I’m sure Private Eye’s Rotten Borough won’t mind me reproducing here for free their lead item from the current issue:
BITTER internal squabbling continues to cost the taxpayer dear in Tower Hamlets, one of Britain’s most deprived boroughs.
Last month the local East London Advertiser (ELA) ran a story, followed up gleefully by the Daily Mail, about the council’s former “interim” chief executive, Aman Dalvi. Mr Dalvi, it said, had “earned £115,000 for 46 days’ work”, or £2,500 a day, while in the temporary post. Local government minister Brandon Lewis accused the council of paying “footballer’s wages”.
Tower Hamlets press office put out a statement saying the story was rubbish and Dalvi’s daily rate hadn’t been anything like that. Yet council accounts clearly state that his “salary, fees and allowances” for the post in 2012-13 had been £115,007, plus £3,884 pension contribution.
He did the job for 46 days in that financial year. The ELA duly did the maths.
So what was the money for? The Eye can explain. About £25,000 of it was pay — at a more modest £550 a day. The other £90k was in settlement of a “racial discrimination” claim brought by Dalvi against the council and its former Labour group leader, Joshua Peck.
Dalvi was appointed to become the council’s interim chief exec in 2011 and took up the job, but failed to secure the permanent post in May 2012.
Some councillors objected to Dalvi
because, they alleged, he was a crony of the borough’s “Independent” mayor, Lutfur Rahman (Eyes passim).
Dalvi claimed some Labour councillors’ attitude was racist and started employment tribunal proceedings; Peck and the council agreed to settle to avoid an astronomical legal bill. Confidentiality clauses all round!
Dalvi got his dosh, but it was confusingly entered in the accounts under “salary”. Peck’s £9,225 bill from law firm Slater Gordon was paid under the heading “miscellaneous expenses” authorised by the council’s “head of paid service”, Stephen Halsey.
Dalvi was miffed because he thought he had secured the top job and then had it snatched away.
It is hard to feel too sorry for him. He got his £90,000 – and went back to his old job as the borough’s “development and renewal director” on £137,000 a year. In all he was paid £256,452 by the council last year.
The ELA had, we understand, put detailed questions to the council press office about the misleading entry in the accounts, but received a “no comment” brush off from the press office – so it was a bit rich of the council to moan about the “inaccurate” story when it appeared.
The Eye asked the press office for an explanation but – much to our surprise – they were unable to comment!
Much of this was detailed on this blog last month, of course. Lutfur’s team of advisers have all been very excited by it because they’ve been whispering conspiratorially that because Josh Peck’s legal fees were paid for, there must have been a backroom deal between him and senior officers to ensure Aman’s appointment was vetoed in favour of a white man.
They’ve been claiming it’s further evidence of racism at the top of the council. This seems to be a fundamental narrative of Lutfur’s re-election campaign.
His opponents, however, allege his administration is characterised by cronyism. He denies it but such allegations do need proof and investigating.
Take this latest issue that’s been highlighted to me.
At the last full council meeting in September Josh Peck tabled this question to Mayor Lutfur Rahman about the Malmesbury estate in Bow.
8.27 Question from Councillor Joshua Peck
Whether he intends to complete Decent Homes works on the Malmesbury and Alfred Estates by May 2014?
It really goes without saying that Lutfur declined to answer it. Instead, we have been given this characteristically measured response from his cabinet member for housing (and wannabe MP), Rabina Khan:
As Cllr Peck will know from our response to his party’s inaccurate and inflammatory press statement on Decent Homes that was so gleefully used as propaganda by the EDL, every single council house in the borough will receive Decent Homes works in the next two years.
It is estimated at present that the internal works on 457-527 Mile End Road properties will be completed in year 3 of the programme, by 31 March 2014, and external works are programmed for year 4 2014/15. The remainder of the estate is currently being programmed, this process will be concluded at the end of September 2013.
So one block has had its revamp work already started, while the rest of the estate had not even been programmed. Was this block in some dire need? No, according to Labour councillors: they’d not had one inquiry from that block, while they knew from their own eyes that other parts of the estate were in far worse condition.
So, a mystery.
But a very fortunate one for the people who live in that block, including a one Abjol Miah.
Remember him?
The former Respect boss who backed Lutfur in October 2010 and whom Lutfur backed in the Weavers by election in May 2012.
This is all probably just a lucky coincidence, I’m sure.
Aman Dalvi is in charge of regeneration at the council and his team is responsible for deciding which blocks have their work done first.
Perhaps one of his people can explain and point to the underlying surveyors’ reports.
Labour are asking questions.
Trial by Jeory 
The fact LBTH’s press office were unable to answer Private Eye’s pertinent questions is Ted’s fault. Everyone knows the LBTH’s press office (also called the Mayor’s Guardian) spend every minute of every day carefully monitoring that social dangerous revolutionary blog called Trial by Jeory 🙂
Consequently the LBTH’s press office has no time to do its normal work.
The Decent Homes Programme were started under Labour at the beginning of the 2000’s. The deadline for completion was 2010. Now we read LBTH hasn’t really started doing the work. Usually the cause for delayed starts is the sheer inability of the local authority to achieve even a basic one star level of competence in housing management. What is LBTH’s excuse this time for its latest major public failure ?
Curious Cat.
I thought making half-cocked threats to national newspapers who write negative things about Rahman – then demanding half a page for an op-ed to set out what a wonderful man he is – was the normal work of the LBTH Press Office.
Explain?
Can you tell us more about Rabina Khan’s Parliamentary aspirations?
Does Labour have a response to this ? The Mayor’s people are using the article to bolster their ‘wronged’ credentials on the door step.
So what’s the story? If they were not guilty of racism they should have defended themselves in court vigorously. It’s not like by settling out of court it was any less costly. Why isn’t the press office giving a statement and if they aren’t someone should ask Josh Peck as the main accused. Also council officers are not very good at identifying the best places to start spending money, often they repair good pavements and leave the cracked and broken well used paths because “they have run out of funding” after spending it fixing things that weren’t broken. Some of these council officers are shockingly incompetent. a simple survey of local opinion or a walkabout would stop money being wasted in this way but some people just want to spend money to show activity rather than think about the effectiveness of the spending. Personally I think we need more people who live in the community to be in these decision making processes rather than some white, middle class guy with fancy degree who has never lived or experienced living in a housing estate. In my opinion experience educates more than any fancy degree. Perhaps we should force these top officers to live in one of the hoses for a couple of weeks as part of their work training.
=> Shumi wrote ….
Its no longer shocking but a daily fact of life. It is not unique to the LBTH. It happens all over England.
One of the reasons is their bosses, usually career local government officials with bloated egos, inflated opinions of their financial worth, whose first loyalty is to local politicians instead of to the council or to the public who pay their salaries and perks, are even more incompetent. There is a lot to recommend compulsory competency examinations for all council staff getting more than £50K p.a.
Will the Mayor, his entourage, his helpful press office or anyone else at LBTH start to sort-out the mess, the wasteful spending and the misery being caused to local residents ? Not likely. They are probably just as incompetent (in my humble opinion) as the other council nincompoops.
It should be an election issue but in LBTH the only thing that matters is getting the Mayor re-elected. Besides most of those voting for the Mayor don’t know what is. I wonder if the Mayor would helpfully explain why he thinks his administration is ‘competent’.
Curious Cat.
Some council officers are very competent indeed, but working for malicious ends. Like thinking their job is to serve the Mayor of Tower Hamlets, rather than the people of Tower Hamlets.
Having just re-read her dire attempt at literature ” Rainbow Hands” she has as much chance of a peerage as Pola Uddin has for financial probity. Or was it the lower chamber she has her sights on?
Mad mullah gone mad! Come on, give me a lecture on my English? I bet you only know the language your mummy taught you? Engage with the discussion and respond to Shumi. Why did the council back down from the battle with Delvi?
Because it was the most rials averse approach. The settlement was done with no admission of guilt or apology remember. A tribunal dispute would have taken some 18 months. Can you imagine the damage and the poison?
As I understand it, even Amanda was shocked at the size of the 90k payout. If he has any dignity he really should be handing it back.
Hmm….I’m fairly sure that there was another Employment Tribunal claim by another high profile senior manager recently, that the HR ctte was conversely prepared to litigate.
Can I answer – as I have to deal with these sorts of disputes frequently? You add up the legal costs associated with defending the claim (which aren’t recoverable in most cases) and then offer that with a discount to the other side because a) you’ll end up saving money even if you win and b) it gets rid of something that takes up a lot of time/effort and is generally quite stressful. It’s called a “commercial settlement” and is the reason why the decks are stacked so much in favour of the employee at tribunals. The Tories are changing this I believe, though too far the other way.
=> Lawyer
Also known as ???
Curious Cat.
What is this strange fixation with Rabina Khan? Bit childish to say the least. How many books have you written and had published? And what exactly is the problem with a woman aspiring to be an MP? Personally I think many more women should stand for political office. First they moan if Bangladeshi women aren’t more civically engaged, then they moan when they are. Out of curiosity, what exactly do you think Rabina should be aiming for? Housewife?
Do you really think that was Ted’s point? Isn’t he able to “moan” at anyone who is “civically engaged” when they do it in a way that isn’t competent?
It was a shocking waste of money. Sometimes I really hate politicians. I am speechless with anger. We should get a statement for the public from all parties involved in this whole sorry mess. It really is disgusting.
And the greed of well paid officers who gleefully pocket our money yet insist they care passionately about frontline services?
No dignity.
That was despicable too. Now that he has proved his point he should hand the money back.
It would be a genuine act of leadership, which would powerfully prove his point. Ironic really.