Bundles of East End Life left in the rain at the Bow distribution depot in 2012 (copyright Ted Jeory)
Is the end in sight for East End Life? It’s been predicted many times before.
But last Friday, Eric Pickles’s Department for Communities and Local Government quietly announced its latest move against 11 councils which continue to publish freesheets more regularly than the Government would like.
Not surprisingly, Tower Hamlets council’s weekly version–which has been the prototype for so many others, which costs far more than the council claims, and which drains vital funds from frontline services–is one of the top targets.
Ministers have given the council until October 9 to respond to their demands the paper should be published no more than four times a year. After that, the department will consider legal action.
Let’s quietly note that the deadline comes the week before Eric Pickles is due to stand up in the Commons and announce the outcome of, and any action arising from, the PwC report into ‘best value’ spending at Mulberry Place. East End Life was part of PwC’s remit.
The letter sent out by DCLG last week is scathing. It says Tower Hamlets is failing to abide by the local government Publicity Code. The council strongly contests this and claims East End Life is popular and serves a public interest. The council says EEL reaches hard-to-reach groups.
DCLG, on the other hand, maintains there are other ways of communicating with such groups and notes the council’s own boasts that broadband access in the borough has risen to 85 per cent.
The government also wants a “flourishing…independent and politically free local media” and argues East End Life works against that. It effectively says East End Life is biased towards Mayor Lutfur Rahman (as it was to the former Labour administration until October 2010).
It says other councils manage perfectly well with quarterly news-sheets, and were there to be any special circumstances in Tower Hamlets, these would justify no more than a couple of extra “special editions” in any year.
The London boroughs of Enfield, Greenwich, Hackney, Hillingdon, Lambeth, Newham and Waltham Forest, as well as Luton, Medway and North Somerset councils have received similar letters.
This is what Local Minister Kris Hopkins says:
Frequent town hall freesheets are not only a waste of taxpayers’ money but they undermine the free press. Localism needs robust and independent scrutiny by the press and public.
Councillors and political parties are free to campaign and put out political literature but they should not do so using taxpayers’ money.
This is the eleventh hour for 11 councils who we consider are clearly flouting the Publicity Code. They have all now been given written notice that we are prepared to take further action, should it be necessary, against any council that undermines local democracy – whatever the political colour.
And here are some extracts of the letter to Tower Hamlets council, the full copy of which I’ve attached below:
The basis of the Secretary of State’s proposal
Information available to the Secretary of State indicates that the London Borough of Tower Hamlets does not attach sufficient importance to ensuring the lawfulness of its publicity. In January 2013 Ofcom concluded that an advertisement, showing the Mayor associated with the house building programme in the borough, was a political advertisement rather than a public service announcement and so breached section 321(3)(g) of the Communications Act 2003 and the UK Code of Broadcast Advertising. The Secretary of State is not aware of any subsequent acceptance by the London Borough of Tower Hamlets of the unlawfulness of this publicity or any firm public commitment of the Council to ensure the lawfulness of all its future publicity and accordingly is proposing the Direction above in relation to the specified provision on lawfulness.
The balance which, with the approval of Parliament, the Publicity Code strikes is that the newssheets etc. of principal local authorities should be published no more frequently than quarterly. Moreover the Secretary of State recognises that the great majority of councils already publish their newssheets no more frequently than quarterly, notwithstanding the wide range of groups that display protected characteristics in the areas of many councils.
Officials from the London Borough of Tower Hamlets wrote to the Secretary of State arguing that following a review of ‘East End Life’ in 2011, the publication was redesigned, TV listings were removed and the publication was made shorter. They also argue that ‘East End Life’ is the most cost effective solution as the weekly publication aims to run on a net-nil budget.
The Council notes that cost effectiveness in one of the seven principles in the Publicity Code, and that advice taken by the Council in 2011 and a finding by the then District Auditor indicated that the decision to proceed with weekly publication was lawful and justified having regard to the provisions of the Publicity Code. The Secretary of State’s provisional view is that these arguments do not sufficiently outweigh the case for as far as practicable maintaining an environment as conducive as possible to the flourishing of an independent and politically free local media, which is an essential element of any effectively operating local democracy.
The London Borough of Tower Hamlets has not drawn to the Secretary of State’s attention any other special circumstances that could justify a departure from the frequency recommendations of the Publicity Code nor is the Secretary of State aware of such circumstances. Moreover, in any event, the Secretary of State considers it likely that were there to be any such circumstances, these would only justify one or two extra ‘special’ editions each year.
Public sector equality duty
In considering the impact of any direction on the London Borough of Tower Hamlets’ public sector equality duty, the Secretary of State has noted that the Council consider that a printed weekly newsletter is “particularly important amongst those seeking work, older white residents and BME residents”.
The Council also state that there is reliance upon ‘East End Life’ by “key demographic subgroups in the Council’s area which, if there was no weekly publication, would otherwise have limited access to relevant information”. The Secretary of State also notes that the Council state that broadband access in Tower Hamlets has increased to 85 per cent and that the Council “would willingly negotiate a manageable timescale for transition to digital delivery”.
The Secretary of State recognises it may be the case, as the London Borough of Tower Hamlets have commented, that some groups in the community that display particular protected characteristics, such as age, disability or religion/belief will less readily be able to obtain the information currently circulated in ‘East End Life’ and hence all other things being equal could be adversely impacted.
However, the Secretary of State believes that it is open to a council having such protected groups to effectively communicate as necessary with them about the services and other matters which are the responsibility of the council without publishing newssheets more frequently than quarterly.
The Secretary of State recognises that the great majority of councils already publish their newssheets no more frequently than quarterly, notwithstanding the wide range of groups that display protected characteristics in the areas of many councils.
Moreover, even if there is an adverse impact the Secretary of State’s provisional view is that the proposed Direction would be justified because of the Government’s overriding policy of maintaining across the whole country an environment that is conducive as possible to the flourishing of the independent and politically free local media. Such media is an essential element of any effectively operating local democracy and hence the pursuit of this policy is a high priority.
DCLG explains that publicity by local authorities should:
- be lawful
- be cost effective
- be objective
- be even-handed
- be appropriate
- have regard to equality and diversity
- be issued with care during periods of heightened sensitivity
It does not inhibit publicity produced by political parties or councillors at their own expense.
And it says, “On appropriate publicity the Code states that:
Where local authorities do commission or publish newsletters, news-sheets or similar communications, they should not issue them more frequently than quarterly, apart from parish councils which should not issue them more frequently than monthly.
And here are some more pictures of council waste:
Copyright Ted Jeory
Copyright Ted Jeory
Copyright Ted Jeory
Copyright Ted Jeory
Trial by Jeory 
Who is pocketing the money the EEL costs? Which companies and/or individuals are being paid (and how much) to produce this dictatorship bullettin? and why does it contain pages in foreign language?
What a disgusting amount of waste. Tonnes of undelivered papers but worse still….they were all filled with biased political nonsense about the nightmayor. Truly a complete waste of tax payers money.
To be fair, I think most of those in the pic were delivered, tho it was a Monday I seem to recall.
Oh i see…..well it still contains rubbish and ends up becoming rubbish so they can’t get off the hook that easily!
THUMBS UP for the great pictures! Its a shame that I like East End Life. I like looking at planning notices, housing and jobs. I would never pay to see these (i.e in a local paper) and I wouldn’t go through the hassle of trying to find it online/in an library etc.
Regardless – great pictures 🙂
The local ‘free’ press doesn’t need EEL to undermine it, they are quite capable of doing that themselves by their irrelevance. I stopped buying the Advertiser in the 1980s.
So you never read it between 2005-08?
And how do you know it’s been irrelevant since the Eighties if you haven’t bought it?
To be fair to S Rayment, the ELA has not been relevant for many years. I stopped buying it about 2011. It prints the Mayor’s press releases if it can’t fill pages, and in the last Mayoral election it may as well have been headed ‘John Biggs’s Weekly Freesheet’.
The ELA is far too scared to print the exposes that come regularly out of the Town Hall, lest they be sued, quivering and shivering over the English law maxim ‘the truth is no defence against a libel case’.
Never mind that the only fighting opposition to Lutfur has been Peter Golds – a Tory – we knew a Tory would never be elected Mayor in May, but that’s no reason to scrub out Peter Golds’s exposes. The ELA cut them out lest Tory voters be impressed by this and vote Tory rather than ‘vote Biggs to keep Lutfur out’
I agree with @WHS. I would never pay for the ELA. I have picked up a few copies of the paper free in Canary Wharf (ironic that its free over there) but the stories don’t interest me at all. They’re short stories and also makes me depressed being a resident in Tower Hamlets. As a resident I’m happy with the level of service I get, the paper just keeps saying everything is wrong.
Dear LBTH sufferers,
1. There is no genuine democracy in English local elections – some council tax paying adult voters are banned by law from voting **AND** there should be an extra candidate on the ballot paper:-
None of the above
Iif ‘None of the Above’ wins, the election must be re-run with different candidates.
2. Unelected and unaccountable to the pubic ‘fat cat’ are spending millions and millions of the public’s money on very questionable projects who seem not to be good value for money, which are essentially frivolous, which are unnecessary.
Neither the Tories nor Labour governments have given the local public any legal powers to object to often faceless people paid vastly more than the UK’s prime minister, wasting the public own money.
3. In the ‘old days’ councillors could be surcharged for wasting the public’s cash. Tony Blair (I think it was) stopped that. Now councillors and elected mayors have no financial restraint to prevent them wasting the public’s cash. They can do so with total impunity.
If you want control over your cash, you have to campaign to implement proper democracy and accountability at your wonderful, marvellous, simply excellent and lovely London Borough of Tower Hamlets.
Do nothing and the crap just continues.
Curious Cat
P.S. Brilliant story and pictorial presentation Ted 🙂
Thank you. I was given a good tip off..
Calling all brainy professors and very clever people,
Looking at an enlargement of the last picture (0021), I thought I saw something like East End Sport on the back page of what appears to be the council propaganda newspaper Eastend Life.
What lawful ability has a local authority to print pages of sports news under the guise it is informing its captive population about legitimate council matters affecting the unfortunates residing within the confines of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets ?
Sports ‘news’ has little, if any, connection to the statutory responsibilities of a badly failing local authority.
Surely locals should be complaining to the current holder of the District Auditor function about unlawful expenditure on providing sports news ?
Curious Cat.
EEL is my main form of communication with the Council, anything happening in my ward I have to find out by reading the adverts on the back pages, usually in the small print. They launched a public consultation on the South Quay Masterplan by putting a nondescript advert on p34 of EEL. They also sent some letters but those arrived after the 1st meeting and they put a page on the THC website 87 minutes before the 1st meeting on a page you could only find by searching for the term South Quay Masterplan!. Only 1 person turned up the 1st meeting not least because none of the buildings in the affected area get EEL delivered. And they did not tell any of the local councillors it was happening 🙂
»»» Andrew,
That unreasonable behaviour MUST NOT be tolerated. Someone should complain directly to Pickles.
They’ve been doing this for years Andrew. For one consultation the Council even forgot to turn up at all.
On a related matter…….
Did you notice that today Theresa May made a particular point of highlighting the divisive politics in Tower Hamlets in her speech to the Conservative Conference – as per the Standard
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-may-uses-tory-conference-speech-to-hit-out-at-tower-hamlets-councils-divisive-politics-9765424.html
“Following divisive community politics and allegations of the mismanagement of public funds in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, Eric Pickles has sent inspectors to investigate Lutfur Rahman, the elected mayor of the borough”
I can only think that the PWC report is going to be absolutely damning about the misuse of public money and its approach.
Remind me what’s that line that Robin Wales takes about how you communicate influences how you integrate communities with different backgrounds?
Does this explain why I haven’t received any copies of EEL for the past 3 weeks? The only item of ‘news’ that’s interesting is the history page…
East End Life is a great newspaper. It saves the council money it would otherwise have to pay another newspaper to advertise statutory notices. Long live EEL.
And the accounting proof for that is what?
No need for any accounting proof. Simple logic.
You have a vested interest Ted. You used to work for East London Advertiser (ELA). You want to EEL to go so that ELA can cash in by charging huge sums for the council’s statutory ads.
Show me the figures. That’s simple logic. A weekly paper needs staff, printing and distribution costs. They’re about £1.5m. Do you think placing ads in local papers or online costs that much?
Why don’t all other local authorities follow suit if so?
I have no vested interest. But nice try at deflection.
Ted, you are asking me to show you the figures. I don’t have the figures, but I know u can get the figures. So, pls go and take a look at the figures. I think you’re just making up the £1.5m number.
Clapham,
Your mentioned figures …….. so where are the figures ? Surely you had the data before you flung your accusations ?
Modelling your financial on profligate LBTH is probably not the best idea 🙂
Curious Cat.
Ted – If you don’t blow your own trumpet – I will! (sounds kinky). The ELA has never been the same since you left.
X
John Wright wants to blow Ted’s trumpet and Ted gives him a kiss.
Just saying
Jealous of Uncle Ted’s brains, ability and ethics ?
Curious Cat, Ted works for the Express newspaper. That should give u an idea of his “brains, ability and ethics”.
Just saying.
I do not disrespect Ted. I think he’s a decent chap, but let’s keep it professional, eh? It’s pointless to talk about the stuff u mentioned, Curious Cat.
Clapham,
Ted is probably the best person the Daily Express has. No employer can diminish their employees’, or their contractors’, .
Ted, like others, has a family to support implying that sometimes one has to do jobs that one wouldn’t ideally choose. The world is, for the vast majority of us, a less than ideal existence. Not all of us have the ‘advantages’ associated with the incumbent mayor 🙂
Curious Cat
Curious Cat, nice try with your explanation. But, I believe that if u have “brains, ability and ethics”, you’d not be stuck in a job that was less than ideal, that u did not like!
Clapham,
Do try to be realistic.
In the past I have worked in jobs I hated but because I was a contractor getting paid vastly more than the employees I did the job to the best of my professional ability. Back then, I considered it was like being a prostitute – doing the job not out of love, affection, happiness but just for money.
Working with dimwits and doing things in a way one knows is not the best but accepting the money because I was saving-up for a new car, brought without a loan, and because such well paid jobs were difficult to find within easy travelling distance of home, I kept working. That is the life of many itinerant contractors. Jump on a plane or drive a thousand miles with a suitcase in the boot, do the job as the client wants and then off to the next contract in the same country or in another country.
Have you really so little experience of life ?
Have you never studied the often sad, lonely, tired, stressed faces of commuters into London every day? Many hate their jobs and the travelling but continue working because of the money.
Since money does not grow on trees many people have little choice, or freedom, to change jobs to something potentially better. It is the same all over the planet.
Curious Cat
Curious Cat, you might have ‘prostituted’ yourself for money, but I sincerely believe that if you have true “brains and ability” you’ll find a job that you love.
Clapham,
If one wants to stay near to the person one loves, then the choice of jobs is severely limited. Happiness comes from just seeing, talking to, holding her hand, making silly jokes and holding her in my arms – it really is sheer bliss.
To give that up is extremely difficult – hence put-up with the crap, do the work, pocket the money and return to the most adorable person in the world.
Not much of a choice is it?
How do you know Ted is not in the same predicament especially as paper newspapers continue to decline in titles, in paid circulation and in appeal to the public at large ? Don’t judge a person’s abilities by his employer’s public stance.
Curious Cat.
Are neither of you capable of commenting intelligently?
I know in 2014 “Yuk, it was in the Daily Mail” and “Yuk, it was in the Daily Express” seems to be the worst possible criticism one can have – a sign that the commenter dismisses the piece entirely, almost as if it came in a newspaper covered in dog’s mess – that a piece in the Mail or Express is beyond the pale, far worse than the Völkischer Beobachter.
May I break it to you that sometimes things in right wing newspapers are not just tripe to be dismissed with an “Ugh, God, it was in the Mail!”. Ted is pointing out massive waste. If a Tory borough spunked money up the wall like this – especially if it were Wandsworth – I know the Mirror would be on it like a shot. So stuff off with your holier-than-thou, less-Tory-than-thou tedium.
I like having this local weekly news delivered to my door for free, it’s one of the nice ways of keeping in touch with what’s going on. I shouldn’t have to buy someone’s idea of a newspaper, or be forced to go online. The political slant is obvious, consistent through all administrations. Eric Pickles should stop interfering – why should he determine the frequency of council publications, this should be decided locally? It’s hardly more democratic to insist they can only publish news 4 times a year.
So you’re happy for the Council to remove £1.5 million plus from front-line services and spend on this ‘free’ paper?
Andrew, it does not matter how many Lab & Tory councillors there are. The main position is the mayor. Everyone knows that! Mayor calls the shots. Councillors r just there for show (to put bottoms on the seats in the council chamber). Hope u can now stop worrying about why u have not been featuring in EEL!
Man on the Clapham Omnibus Thanks, your right the Mayor (Boris) calls the shots.
http://www.wharf.co.uk/2014/10/boris-steps-in-on-south-quay-m.html
Many residents of Tower Hamlets do not get it delivered especially those living in the big new blocks. Most of the things happening in Tower Hamlets do not make it into EEL so how do you keep in touch with what is happening? How is one parties use of a taxpayer funded newspaper democratic?
Andrew, almost everyone gets EEL. It is quite democratic. It does not feature what one party (i.e. THF) is doing. It features what the mayor and his cabinet r doing. They r the council. They’ve been elected by the people. If u ever get elected mayor, you can have your pic in EEL too. Until then, it’s uncle Lutfur (or Lutfur bhai) all the way.
You’re having a laugh Omnibus… my block got it a few times several years ago but now it NEVER does. I reckon they’re selective where they distribute it, perhaps only to marginal voters…
Just because it gets delivered doesn’t mean it’s read or that it’s useful or popular.
Omnibus – Distribution of EEL 83,000, number of TH homes in the 2011 census 105,000 (has increased since then due to new buildings). Some of the 83,000 sit in IDEAS stores, Council buildings etc so I estimate at least 25,000 + households do not get EEL many in wards with big new blocks like mine
There are 22 Labour, 18 THF and 5 Conservative councillors, do their stories get covered in proportion to their numbers, of course not.
Andrew – those statistics on their own ought to spell the end for EEL as it’s patently obvious that discrimination is being exercised as to who gets it.
If you want to find out what’s going on, spend 60p once a week on a local paper. Anyone who can’t grasp this should be shot. And I include Takki Suleiman, plainly posting under the name ‘Konnu’ here.
To Konnu,
Would the senior management of the LBTH object if Pickles banned the council running a travel agency, a car cleaning service, a greengrocers (fruit and vegetables shop) and a How to Win the National Lottery Advisory Service (picture of the mayor on every leaflet) ?
The local authority is not in the newspaper business. It is a public service. So why, in 2014, is any local authority doing non-core and non-essential activities – undemocratically charged to the local public – when those local authorities can not yet run their public services in a fit, proper, competent and confidence inspiring manner ?
Surely getting the basics perfect ought to be the council’s highest priority rather than neglecting perfection in council service delivery to enable bored, and possibly surplus, staff to spend the public’s money pretending they are aspiring Rupert Murdocks ?
The public do NOT owe any council fat cat a living. Yet those fat cats delight in spending other people’s cash on frivolities disguised as ‘essential public services’.
Surely you know the status quo is neither morally correct nor publicly acceptable ?
Curious Cat
Whatever the real amount, it hasn’t been “removed” from anything. And you could use similar arguments against any spending that isn’t “front-line”.
I don’t read the EEL so can’t comment on it’s content. But I do know that it’s widely circulated in the borough and most people I talk to find it a useful source of information.
It would be interesting to know the actual cost of this publication after the income generated from advertising is deducted. Also the money Council would spend to provide statutory notices and ads, if it wasn’t there would need to be factored in. Plus the potential of job losses. I suspect the economic case wouldn’t stack up too well.
However, there is a case to review the published information and it’s frequency. But I am absolutely against that overweight Tory git telling us what to do. People of TH do not want Tories making decisions here. We’ve elected our own representatives who will decide what to do.
Labour want EEL scrapped in its current format as well, remember.
Labour established the current format, published it for years!
Labour is the cause of ALL the Tower Hamlets problems – past and present. Don’t fool yourself into thinking Labour are the good people in Tower Hamlets. Whereas a few individuals may be good, they are powerless to improve things and meanwhile the Real Labour carry-on and blame everyone else.
No Joking. Only Labour can wreck things better than the Tories. Just who educated Son of Labour ? Who implements EEL ? Who created mayors for London Boroughs ? Who stopped councillors being surcharged for wasting the public’s money ? Well, it weren’t the Tories or the Lib Dims or even UKIP.
What are the real differences between Labour and the Son of Labour ? Very few methinks.
The thing about Labour is they are inherently forgetful. A recent manifestation of Labour’s memory loss was Ed’s conference speech. The other Ed, Mr Balls-up, forgot about Labour’s wrecking of the British economy and about Labour’s attacks on the NHS with their stupid rip-off PFI. (Radio 4 said 2 weeks ago, a PFI hospital was built for £51 million but the Trust has to pay-back £286 million). Is the NHS really safe in Labour’s dodgy hands ?
By the way, what type of man only marries the mother of his 5 children when he was appointed Labour Party Leader ?
Nationally if Labour was really a suitable party for national government they would have criticised Tower Hamlets years ago. Instead inert and confused Labour do nothing and say nothing. Can’t have Labour criticising their very own Son of Labour.
Thankfully I don’t have Labour’s standards or Labour’s morals 🙂 This Labour are an insult to the original and good Labour.
Its time the TH Tories got more aggressively active and championed the locals against their autocratic council.
Tower Hamlets has become a laughing-stock borough under Labour and now under Son of Labour. What a mess.
Curious Cat
(and I am entirely sober but tired)
Oh no! With EEL gone, what will I put my muddy shoes on?
Barge Lane, you should recycle EEL; not put your muddy shoes on it.
The whole reason why this government wanted local councils to stop publishing their own newspapers was because they listened to lobbying by local newspaper bodies who insisted it was causing their own papers to go out of business. No evidence for that – local papers are going out of business all over the country including many areas where there is no competition from local authority publications or anything else. (The National Union of JOurnalists was sitting on the fence as the closure of local authority publications would lead to journalist redundancies.)
The death knell continues to sound for the ELA and getting rid of EEL will make no difference.
EESW seems to be confused.
Why on earth such any English local authority employ members of the NUJ to write news which is political biased, deliberately conceals the truth (cover-ups disasters and failures) and is used to promote the re-election prospects of the chosen few ?
Councils should concentrate on serving the public and carrying-out their statutory functions instead of setting-up their own (usually Labour) controlled newspaper.
The fact is LBTH and other usually Labour councils continually fail to properly serve the public. Instead of actually concentrating on doing their core work better, more efficiently and giving the public genuine value-for-their-money, councils want to pretend they are Rupert Murdocks and splash-out the public’s council taxes on non-essential time-wasting frivolities.
Why is EEL publishing SPORTS ‘NEWS’ ? Why is EEL carrying commercial advertisements ? Why are council staff not doing their real council jobs but pretending they are working for a fantasy newspaper ?
Seems that wonderful LBTH has again lost its sense of purpose and of its proper direction. Will the next load of bollocks be Tower Hamlets Council’s MOT Testing Station followed by Tower Hamlets Council’s Insurance Services Ltd and Tower Hamlets Council’s Children’s Clothing Shops? The madness should not continue.
Councils are supposed to do council work, not newspapers work. Surely EESW can distinguish between the two ?
Anyone claiming everything the London Borough of Tower Hamlets does is perfect ? No one would dare. Then why is the council playing like a bored child by running a newspaper at the public’s expense ?
What would EESW say if LBTH started a car cleaning service at the public’s expense ? or a travel agency advertising holidays in the sun ? or a dry cleaners to save Son of Labour the hard work of taking his suits to be cleaned ?
Lets keep councils under control since they seem to be out-of-control and freely doing whatever they like whilst being totally indifferent to the wishes of the public the clowns are supposed to be serving.
Curious Cat
There are so many enigma’s with EEL. Who exactly has to pay for advertisements? Or is it left to EEL who it charges. For example local schools get full page advertisements, WHY? I thought parents were clamouring for places for their children. If schools are actually paying for these pages surely that’s a large chunk of their budget wasted?
If EEL want to be genuinely for the people why haven’t they got the guts to have a “Letters” page where residents could criticise or praise the council?
I wonder how many residents (if they actually get it) put it straight into the bin.
Lets ditch it and spend the money where it is desperately needed, like foodbanks, help for the elderly and disabled, in fact all those who are less fortunate than ourselves.
Question: Are the full accounts for EEL published, or are they hidden in the muddy mire of council accounts?
Great idea – A Letters Page or multiple pages.
Where do I send my letters to ?
🙂
Curious Cat.
In 2011 the Council could have decided to scrap EEL and divert the £1.5m into essential services. However, in contravention of DCLG guidelines it has continued.
The Council say they did a review into whether the rag should continue. For some strange reason, this review was done by Takki Sulaiman whose £100k a-year job largely exists to write EEL! Not surprisingly then, his report found in favour of keeping it despite his number of exaggerated claims that included:
All Council directorates use EEL for marketing and advertising. However, cheaper rates are available elsewhere thus wasting tax-payer’s money paying to advertise in EEL.
He claimed the cost of scrapping EEL was between £635,000 to £2.1M. This was based on the one-off costs of scrapping contracts and advertising in local papers. Sulaiman quoted the comparative costs of advertising elsewhere without discount. He claimed to have spoken to local papers to obtain these rates. When the figures were checked with the ELA his figures included no discount but one would have been offered. In addition, Sulaiman appeared to have inflated the comparative costs by more than 50% for no apparent reason. Given Sulaiman’s vested interest it’s no wonder he embellished his facts to produce an outcome most convenient to himself.
Sulaiman’s final act of logic twisting was that one of the requirements of the DCLG is that any publication must promote cohesion and equality. Sulaiman wrote an editorial policy requiring EEL to promote cohesion and equality and this, he claims, justifies its existence.
So there we have it, taxpayers money being wasted by Sulaiman’s conflict of interest and the interests of politicians being put before the people of Tower Hamlets who they claim to serve.
A review by the person who runs the service is not an independent review. There is a very good chance such a review will be self-serving in the interests of preserving is overpaid and highly paid job.
On a matter as controversial as this (i.e. it has the Secretary of State highlighting it as a major issue) any sensible CEO would have ordered an independent review by an impartial party with expertise in such matters. That doesn’t have to be an external consultant. It could be a responsible officer from another authority.
But then we don’t have a CEO do we?
I look forward to the new CEO for Tower Hamlets putting and end to the waste associated with EEL and the Mayor’s propaganda office.
Be careful with ALL local authority reviews.
What is required is an independent re-investigation of the original matter, NOT a restricted (by remit) review of how the council the complaint/protest/objection.
In this particular instance, the policy maker seems to have reviewed his own policy. The local authority knew, in advance, this was rather dodgy and was not in any way by a person un-connected to the matter, yet the London Borough of Tower Hamlets went ahead with its arrogant abuse of its statutory responsibility.
Clearly the council thinks the public are too powerless and too weak to do anything. How right the local authority is !
Curious Cat.
@YCMIU: I don’t think anyone claimed it was an ‘independent’ review – it was an internal review. It did make use of independent evidence, particularly the polling that has been repeatedly cited.
@Jay Kay: Takki’s £100k job does not exist to write EEL. That’s the job of a bunch of other people who are paid a lot less (not saying an argument couldn’t be made about them but if the truth’s bad enough there’s no need to make stuff up to make it appear worse). For as long as it has the reputational issues it has, the council will employ a Head of Comms on a high salary – EEL or no EEL.
Disagree. Lbth has had v highly paid head of comms for as long as I’ve been covering the borough, ie before the reputation issues became this dire.
In fact, a good way to restore the council’s reputation would be to slash the salary paid to that position, or redefine and slash.
[…] in the firing line. Outside London, Luton, Medway and North Somerset councils face action too. Trial by Jeory and 853blog have already done very decent write ups of the proposed action over the Tower Hamlets […]
How long are people going to tolerate this rubbish from the council, that East End Life is self financing.The editorial staff and advertising staffs wages must easily exceed a half a million per year.Add to this the cost of paying Trinity Mirror to print and then the cost of distribution, we are easily looking at well over £3 million per year.The council have confirmed the editors and reporters are being paid salaries well above National Journalists Union rates.For what, producing basically a cut and paste job of council spin handouts.This paper can easily be produced in a day.So what do these esteemed journalists,do with their time?Its certainly a free holiday,52 weeks of the year,at our expense.Likewise, five advertising staff.They are having a joke.Revenue from ads is only minimal.The main ads are all public sector, so one way or the other we are paying for these.The smaller ads from Micks eateries or Bob the odd job man only bring in peanuts.Plus also the huge amounts paid to free lancers and the endless minions who frequent the papers office, but are not important enough to warrant inclusion on the mast head…
I have attended many a function where the EEL reporter was present and she appeared more interested in the buffet than the actual event.
Any resident can tell you of bundles of the paper routinely dumped in the chute rooms on estates across the borough.Others usually only get delivered on Tuesday or Wednesday, making any listings in the paper useless.Just check the stands at any Idea Stores, housing offices or even the Town Hall on Fridays, the final “pick up”day and see the stands still fully stocked.It appears to be common knowledge that there is so many “unclaimed back issues” in store rooms of these premises awaiting removal for pulping, that some staff are allegedly making utterances of health and safety risks and fire hazards,I also hear that are still many issues of the Olympic specials the council produced in the summer of 2012 dusting up the place.
Eric Pickles needs to act now and put a end to this farce.
They need to change the law and make the THF councillors and mayor personally liable for the costs of their mismanagement…
MEANWHILE ERIC IS SHARPENING THE KNIVES…
Mon cher Maurice,
That was the law before Labour (a.k.a. Tony Blair) changed it.
Admittedly a few councillors killed themselves because of the worry of having to pay vast amounts of money back to the public. That was a sad tragedy for everyone involved including their families and friends.
However Labour’s Free Unlimited Frivolous Spending Act** which removed all councillors’ liability for misspending and/or unlawfully spending public cash, has encouraged the worse dregs of Humanity to profligately waste vast amounts of public money with total impunity. They do not care.
Naturally Labour, and its Son of Labour, gleefully jumped on the bandwagon metaphorically chucking out bundles of £50 notes and cheques galore some of which went to seemingly dubious recipients.
English local government is a cesspit. Covering it up with soft toilet paper is not the answer: cleaning-out the entire purifying mess is. After all, the public really do deserve much better – it is their cash the rogues are wasting.
Pickles ? Too fat, too much empty hot air and always devoid of satisfying substance. As a former northern Leader of a Council, he really does know how bad local government is.
** Local Government Act 2000, s.90
Curious Cat
[…] is one of only two councils to publish a weekly newspaper – the other is Tower Hamlets, which today was accused of having a “culture of cronyism” by communities secretary […]