Ahead of Wednesday’s full council meeting, this is a guest post by Cllr Oliur Rahman, leader of the 12-strong Tower Hamlets Independent Group (formerly known as Tower Hamlets First). Discuss…
Much has been made of the dawn of a new kind of politics.
With the bitterness of last year behind us, it is our hope that we can work constructively across parties to put Tower Hamlets first.
Our group would be the first to admit that Mayor Biggs’ administration has had some successes, based on the Mayor’s ability to look beyond party politics and continue to implement much of former Mayor Lutfur Rahman’s progressive agenda. Mayor Biggs is not the only one to admit that Tower Hamlets was generally a “well-run borough”, as he put it, under his opponent.
The Municipal Journal, the National Association of Care Catering, Keep Britain Tidy and a range of professional bodies have celebrated the former Mayor’s legacy – while figures across the spectrum as diverse as an Anglican canon, the Conservative former political editor of the Spectator and centre-left Guardian writer Zoe Williams have cast doubt on the merit of the court judgment that saw Lutfur barred from office.
We must now move forward and this new age of conciliation has seen some big wins for the people of Tower Hamlets. Mayor Biggs has defended our administration’s landmark education grants for young people. After some regrettably costly delays, he has gone ahead with our plans for the regeneration of Whitechapel, the creation of a new civic centre and a multi-faith burial ground that between them will create 3,500 new homes and 5,000 jobs while preserving dedicated space for culture and small business.
Biggs is pushing ahead with plans for landlord licensing, school places and new social and affordable housing developed by our previous administration, along with our proposed policy of mayoral question times. The current administration have developed our plans with an Affordability Commission to investigate what kind of genuinely affordable housing we should provide – which we welcome, but believe should not have property developers and social landlords with poor service records sitting on it while no opposition spokespeople are invited onto the panel.
Mayor Biggs’ drive for transparency is also an important one, which can now progress freely in a less contentious environment. His Transparency Protocol and whistleblowing procedure will facilitate a more open culture at senior management level – but he would be well advised to go further. The lack of transparency over a grant to the Rich Mix of nearly a million pounds, made by executive order behind closed doors with little real rationale rings dangerously of patronage politics.
Details here: https://t.co/hLwwoM95LW Biggs agrees to make move by May to comply with Gov code on council publicity
— Ted Jeory (@TedJeory) January 6, 2016
Or a chance for a new local paper to enter the fray if any angel investors out there for someone..
— Ted Jeory (@TedJeory) January 6, 2016
His decision to scrap East End Life, again by a secretive executive order and in spite of overwhelming support from members of the public for the paper, is also questionable. There seems little other way currently for Tower Hamlets to communicate with vulnerable and digitally excluded residents about the services they should be aware of. Setting up a Transparency Commission chaired by his own aide John Pierce was also questionable.
In the Mayor’s defence, he, like all politicians, has powerful interests pressuring him – in his own party, in Town Hall politics, and in the form of Eric Pickles’ commissioners who were recently accused of a complete lack of transparency by a leading voluntary sector organisation. We hope that in spite of all that he is able to stick to the pledges he was elected on: getting tough on waste, creating a more open council, delivering decent housing and strengthening our communities. There are many things we disagree on, but those aims we can get behind.
Looking ahead, the first budget by Mayor John Biggs is imminent. The Independent Group has consistently opposed cuts to the most vulnerable, particularly those which affect frontline services and increase charges for critical services or to succumb to “false” savings just to balance the books without considering the overall impact and wider picture.
Mayor’s budget proposals include cuts in funding for incontinence laundry service for the most vulnerable and elderly, youth services, free home care for the elderly, voluntary sector grants, children’s school history trips to Gorsefield, bursaries for university students and PGCE training for BAME teachers, Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS), East End Life, introducing new charges for adult care and deleting the posts of 10 THEOs (environment/waste cleaning), as part of the Mayor’s £18m of cuts now, with £63m cuts over three years. We feel this approach lacks a vision and is simply managerial.
Independent Group highlighted this, by way of just one example, at the Scrutiny meeting on January 4, that to get rid of 10 THEOs would not contribute to the cleaner streets that were among the Mayor’s top priorities. The large volume of food outlets, small businesses and markets that are a core part of the local economy generate a considerable deal of waste, which coupled with fly-tipping, graffiti and other associated issues present a considerable challenge to delivering cleaner and greener streets.
If the Mayor and his colleagues decide to cut Child and Adolescent Mental Health (CAMH) services, alongside cuts to youth services, it is likely to both exacerbate the situation and create issues. Deprivation is often linked to poor mental health, and in Tower Hamlets, one in two children live in poverty, so it is vital to provide safety and therefore continuity with CAMH services. Speaking to people who work in youth services we know they provide support and safe spaces, which contribute to a young person’s sense of wellbeing and provides the opportunity to have the life-skills needed to prosper.
Unemployment is another burgeoning problem in Tower Hamlets. Canary Wharf provides thousands of jobs but predominantly filled by finance specialists from outside the borough. Therefore we believe that any cuts to the current system of paying wages to those on internships and bursaries for teacher training courses from BAME groups is following the Tory government suit by forcing the poor to disproportionally shoulder the cuts. Public sector jobs, such as teaching, provides a sixth of the borough’s jobs and therefore a system that provides opportunities for citizens to be a part of the workforce is worth protecting.
It is well documented that cuts to youth services, as proposed by Mayor Biggs, coincides with a rise in crime and antisocial behaviour – coupled with this administration’s proposal to remove the safety net for the police budget – will undoubtedly create disastrous results. Safety in the community is not a privilege but a necessity, and a child lost to the criminal justice system is both costly and tragic.
It would be remiss of me not to talk about the proverbial elephant in the room. Many have speculated we are simply looking for a route back into a renewed Labour party under Jeremy Corbyn. This is nothing new: most of our group were Labour people exiled from the party either by the disastrous decision to go to war in Iraq, or by the rigging of a mayoral selection in Labour that even election judge Richard Mawrey agreed was indefensible. We were drawn from all ranks of Labour – Lutfur was a Progress member and David Miliband supporter at the time of his expulsion!
But we are here first and foremost to serve the people of this borough – and when the current administration is considering weathering austerity with cuts to teaching bursaries, library closures and the sacking of council staff who keep our streets clean (following a pledge to get tough on waste), it is our duty to stand up for residents’ interests. We have a crippling housing crisis, severe pockets of poverty and a range of social problems that we have a responsibility to help fix. That’s what we were elected for – and in 2016, we hope to be able to perform that duty constructively and positively across civil society organisations, political parties and communities.
May I take this opportunity to wish your readers and residents a peaceful, prosperous and happy 2016.
Why are we employing the THEOs anyway? The Council has a contract for waste collection and it’s high time those responsible to overseeing its implementation got really tough with the contractors and ensured that they meet all the REQUIRED CONTRACT STANDARDS for street cleanliness – or suspend contract payments.
I’d much prefer to see money spent on telling people how to report problems with waste on the streets.
A report to FixMyStreet https://www.fixmystreet.com seems to work much faster at securing action than any THEO or any call to the Council. Maybe because people get to post photos and make a public record of the way in which the official Council contractor fails to meet standards!?
FixMyStreet is already extremely well used by the citizens of Tower Hamlets – but it would be great if even more used it.
The most significant part of this post is the “no entry” sign in the photograph!
Time for a quick chorus of “won’t get fooled again”……..
Scrapping Tower Hamlets Homes would provide the savings. The Council pays c.£30m per year to THH as a ‘management fee.’ In 2 years this would save the c.£60m sought.
What on earth do you suppose the management fee covers? Couldn’t be the cost of the staff who run the housing service and associated services by any chance?
So when the Council are not paying THH – how much will it cost the Council to run a housing service? Nothing?
Biggs was right to be cautious about moving the Town Hall to Whitechapel and to check the estimated cost of the move. Remember the previous Mayor didn’t seem to know how many houses he himself owned and is now bankrupt. Only a fool would trust his costings.
THEOS – Waste of money. The FixMyStreet App is better for reporting than any number of THEOS. You are dead right “You couldn’t make it up” – it is better than FiFiLi as the public can see what is reported not just a handful of council officers.
And as for all your claims Oli of secret decisions – you are having a laugh. East End Life has signposted the changes for months now and given us (the public) opportunities to feed into the process.
Good to see some transparency is emerging in Tower Hamlets.
Most interesting reading. Whilst I can see there was little choice but to comply with the Commissioners about publication of East End Life I am surprised this was not seen as a “key decision”?
There are various requirements to be met before a “key decision” can be made including enhanced notice and publication in a forward plan see http://moderngov.towerhamlets.gov.uk/mgListPlans.aspx?RPId=720&RD=0 for more details.
Whether or not a proposed decision by a council is or is not treated as a “key decision” can be a major part of being transparent.
Tower Hamlets define a “key decision” in Article 13.03 of their constitution as:
(b) Key decisions
(i) A “key decision” is an executive decision which is likely
a) to result in the local authority incurring expenditure which is, or the making of savings which are, significant having regard to the local authority’s budget for the service or function to which the decision relates; or
b) to be significant in terms of its effects on communities living or working in an area comprising two or more wards in the borough.
(ii) A decision taker, when making a decision may only make a key decision in accordance with the requirements of the Executive Procedure Rules set out in Part 4 of the Constitution.
(iii) The Council has not adopted a financial threshold for key decisions. However, the criteria that the Mayor, Councillors and officers will have regard to in determining what amounts to a key decision include the following:
– Whether the decision may incur a significant social, economic or environmental risk.
– The likely extent of the impact of the decision both within and outside of the borough.
– Whether the decision is likely to be a matter of political controversy.
– The extent to which the decision is likely to result in substantial public interest.
(From http://moderngov.towerhamlets.gov.uk/documents/s66412/Article13%20Decision%20Making.pdf)
I’d think that decision made would be a “key decision” under a number of the headings above – so why was it not? Is this a sign of other decisions being said not to be “key decisions” so they could be made with less chance of being noticed?
Talking of transparency Shahed Ali’s trial starts next month. I’ll get the popcorn in
What are the charges ?
And by the way John Biggs did not decide to get rid of East End Life. The commissioners decided that for him. Something to do with it being unlawful and a gross waste of taxpayers money. Who knew??
Anyway Oli, how’s that Judicial Review you were all bleating on about after the election trial working out for ya?
The Independent group (s) however many there are really cut a pathetic sight these days.
No power, no money to give out, no patronage, no leadership, no legitimacy, no brains, no officers to cover their tracks – nothing.
How sad.
Yer.
We are all crying 🙂
Did THEO’s ever exist? Has anyone seen them? Not even the Council’s own ASB phone operators had ever heard of them.
The idea of moving the Town Hall to Whitechapel was not originally Lutfur Rahman’s, he just appropriated it. It is a great idea though, to have the Town Hall and council offices in the middle of the borough and with good transport links. Accessibility will definitely help to improve public participation, which as we all know would not have been to the previous Mayor’s liking, so I would love to know what were the real reasons for his support for the idea.
Moving out the Town Hall to inaccessible fortress-style offices close to Canary Wharf was an act both of arrogance and extravagance which infuriated many residents. It is good to see they are finally being listened to.
It is sad, if unsurprising, that Oliur Rahman and his ‘Independents’ have not done any soul-searching nor learnt any lessons from the events of the past year but keep persisting with peddling their deluded and thoroughly inaccurate versions of thereof. Describing such dysfunctional, inept and law-breaking council as Tower Hamlets as well-run is beyond pathetic. As is describing the ‘Independents’ input into the running of the Council as ‘work’- a serious misuse of the word.
I personally won’t miss East End Life- if it got delivered at all, whatever useful information it contained was too heavily laced with propaganda, Pravda-style, which made it unreadable, and I am not the first person to observe this.
Tower Hamlets is not the only council who was forced to get rid of their paper. Labour-run Greenwich even threatened legal action to keep theirs.
They do exist! I bumped into one on Toynbee Street when I was locking up my bike. This is how it went:
THEO comes over to me
THEO: You should wear a helmet when you cycle
Me: I know
THEO: So?
Me: It’s not a legal requirement, so I choose not to wear one. I appreciate the advice though.
THEO: I’ll let you off this time
Me: Let me off what?
THEO: *walks away*
V funny
Obviously needs lots of care and attention and friendly chats about not bullying members of the public.
Obviously not properly trained in the execution of his duties.
Obvious lack of adequate supervision.
Ah well, it is Tower Hamlets.
Curious Cat
What a load of bollocks. Whom does ‘white washing’ Oli think he is fooling ?
The basic facts are THF got elected by fooling the voters into thinking they were voting for ethical, honest, decent, competent, caring, concerned civic-minded members of the wider community of Tower Hamlets.
Instead the long-suffering public got a bunch of cowards who stood idly by, too afraid of confronting wrong doing, highly questionable activities and dodgy behaviour by their chosen Leader.
Admittedly THF can always claim they could not read English, they lacked the requisite intelligence to understand council reports, their hearing-aids ran out of battery power at council meeting, the never understood what was happening in front of their own eyes or they were so intimidated they dare not raise a protest or go to the police or other authorities because their feared for their lives and the lives of their families. (sounds of sad violin music in the background)
Whatever the expected plethora of anticipated excuses, only an absolute idiot will ever claim THF was a really wonderful, impressive in a positive manner, bunch of individuals working tirelessly day and night to make better the lot of the ordinary citizens of Tower Hamlets.
This past week BBC London News shows Biggs stating that at least 600 of Tower Hamlets Homes were re-let to unauthorised tenants. Running a public housing authority means due diligence – but “diligence” is a dirty unattractive word in the murky world of TTH and of the former THF empire that came crashing down only because of 4 brave citizens who took on the almighty powerful (whom some say was protected by the local police).
Hang your heads in great shame all ye former THF. I think you badly failed the public who trusted you and who depended on you doing a FIRST CLASS job for them and for the borough generally.
A new year begins but the stench of the past years has yet to leave my nostrils.
Now if all you THF councillors were to resign and seek re-election my confidence in you individually would increase slightly. What too afraid the public would no longer vote for you ?
A Happy New Year to all. The past is too too recent to ignore when so many, in my opinion, were guilty of ignoring the dreadful sights before their own eyes – Oh, sorry I forgot THF wear spectacles they kept forgetting to put-on.
Curious Cat
P.S. TO OLI
Surely you are not the man who as deputy leader went to Greece ?
Surely TH had, at that time, many more urgent, serious and important matters to occupy your time ? Just what was your priority then: TH or a trip to the far end of the Med to “hand-out” advice ?
I’m glad the Greeks had the wisdom not to take advice from the bunch of seeming disconnected from reality THF finest.
CC.
Here’s a suggestion – the Council could create a bye-law making any fast food retailer and/or market stall vendor wholly responsible for all the fast food and other litter dropped in the street which started from the place where they are located. Thus the fast food shops and market stalls have two options – they either organise and pay for the removal of the waste in their area or they pay taxes/fines – which then pays for the council’s employment of people to remove waste.
That way the cost of to the people of Tower Hamlets of clearing up the waste associated with these retail operations is zero – and we get a cleaner borough.
Just a thought….
What pathetic nonsense from a corruptly and illegally elected Councillor.
I understand that the judicial review hearing is next week (unless someone else has better information?).
Shame we can’t just scrap the embarrassingly redundant and deluded ‘Independent Group’ and spend the money on repairing the woefully run down Tower Hamlets streets.
Remember that Judge Mawrey was minded to disqualify all the Tower Hamlets First candidates but they had not been named in the Election Petition and it was out of time for a further action to be bought.
There was also the question of perjury – police matter?
The real scandal is where was / is the local Standards Board? Asleep?
In the immediate past context of Tower Hamlets world, “standards” is a word of much dubious merit and doubtful meaning. Some think “standards” is a pseudonym for perpetuating evil:-
See no evil
Hear no evil
Question no evil
Following that THF agenda, evil does not exist so there is no need for Tower Hamlets to have “standards”. Your vote, your money and your best welfare was safe in the hands of Tower Hamlets Finest.
Curious Cat
The Standards Board was abolished and Judge Mawrey had this to say of the Police – ‘an unkind person might remark that the police …
had appeared to take as their rôle models the legendary Three Wise Monkeys.
Update (note the ref back to 2005)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/12128815/Lutfur-Rahman-Judge-accuses-disgraced-former-mayor-of-mortgage-fraud-and-tax-evasion.html
Birds of a feather flock together ???
Anyone care to name all the blameless ones in the former Tower Hamlets Finest (THF) ?
e.g.
What is the next scheduled Rahman event ?
Curious Cat.
Let’s hope the Police finally get off their hands and get involved.
Would help if someone donated a case of Superglue remover.
There is a genuine risk that if the actions demanded by the public take place there are likely to be embarrassed faces down at the nick.
He’s probably on a plane back to his mansion in Bangladesh this moment or to the flat he owns in Dubai.
I hope HMRC and the CPS receive a copy of this latest judgement
Oh ! Perks of the job ?
Time to dust-off the extradition treaties.
CC.
A very long time ago I said I suspected that the whole debacle associated with the ex-Mayor would eventually revolve around whether or not he had been paying tax properly – and so it has come to pass!
One can’t help thinking that HMRC now need to be seen to do a proper investigation.
How many councillors is that now who have been identified as fraudsters in court?
BTW Ted – how about a comment on this?
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/31/electoral-register-loses-estimated-800000-people-since-changes-to-system
How many voters have disappeared from the electoral register in LBTH since registration by individuals rather than the Head of the Household was required?
All good points about Tower Hamlets Homes.If Peter Golds had been elected this inept, wasteful drain on public money would have been given its notice.
Yet Biggs like all his other election promises allows and positively encourages it to continue and expand with little regard for the financial cost to tenants and residents.
Under Gavin Cansfield TTH squandered vast amounts on needless staff,procurement of expensive equipment which is never used,vehicles,and costly rebranding.of logos.Plus worst of all costly numerous surveys.Anyone remember”the getting to know you”one which was nothing more than a exercise into peoples private lives.Private company employed at the cost of thousands to collate residents race,religion,sexual orientation.That was all Cansfield was interested in useless,countless surveys,not any real work or value for money.
His biggest folly had to be the care taking Dept. and the resultant cost to tenants and leaseholders alike.Pre TTH it was sufficient for one caretaker per estate to do the little work they have.Cansfield’s bright idea was to employ basically one caretaker per block. regardless wether they had any work to do or not.So mass recruitment occurred and as anyone who resides on a TH estate knows we now have scores of caretakers,supervisors and managers coming and going at will and no work to do.Contracted to work 8 to 4 with one hour lunch 12 to 1. If they turn before 8.30 your lucky,then its doing zero till 11,and then disappearing for two plus lunch hour then home by 3.30Many do not even bother leaving the local office all day.The plain facts are their is no work for them,you could easily cut this workforce by two thirds and no one would notice.It is absolutely disgraceful this abuse of public money.Rahman and his housing chief Rabina Khan were told continually yet ignored it and Cansfield refused to justify the waste when contacted by residents.It would appear Biggs and the new CEO Susmita Sen(how does any council justify paying £130,000 per year to do nothing) are also to gutless to act.So tenants and leaseholders expect more large increases in service charges to cover this waste and give your caretaker a little wave when he goes home at 3.30 after wasting the day away at your expense.
The Government has ordered councils to cut social rents by one per cent for the next two years.Residents fully expect TTH to implement this from April.
Biggs and his cabinet has shown with his Budget Increase he care little for people on low incomes and like Rhman is detirmed to encourage a welfare dependency attitude in the borough.TTHs stance on non payment of rent is similar to the councils one on council tax “not paying it,we don’t really give a toss, we wont we chasing you for it”
The savings as stated previously by dismantling TTH are enormous.
Excellent revealing posting written with genuine passion and concern.
Tower Hamlets is not alone in that behaviour. Other Labour-run councils did exactly the same – that’s uncanny.
Biggs is typical Labour – the public’s great expectations evolve into great disappointment. None of the national parties politicians really cares about the public and will fool and mislead the public just to get elected.
Time for some critical questions directed at Biggs at the next council meeting.
Perhaps the best minds on this blog, regardless of their political preferences, can co-operate in wording the questions they public want answering ?
People Power in Tower Hamlets or just downtrodden victims afraid or disinterested or unwilling to start moaning loudly and repeatedly for a Better Tower Hamlets ?
Curious Cat