Toleration levels

Posted on by

Surgery all morning dealing with constituents’ problems followed by a home visit to a disabled gentleman who wanted me to pop round. I stayed about three quarters of an hour. Last appointment was to go over to the offices of the Howard League for Penal Reform.

As prison spokesperson – this was really interesting. There is a natural alliance between our position and the work they do. The Director said something really interesting during our long discussion. She said that we need to tolerate as a society. What she was referring to was the sort of zero-tolerance environment that was being created by the political battle between Labour and Tory as to who could be tougher on young people and the causes of young people. I think what she was saying was that we need to learn to tolerate a bit of noise, a bit of dirt – a bit of life. And that the pendulum was swinging (swingeing even) too far towards the punitive.

A lot of sense there. However, I said to her, that the other side of that coin was that in my view care in the community wasn’t working. And it’s the police and the prisons who bear the brunt of that.

So – I am thinking about tolerance levels. What should we tolerate? Weighty stuff for a Friday afternoon!

Finish day rounding up the info from the Huhne leadership campaign. All seems to be going incredibly well. Momentum is with us. More and more councillors, peers and supporters are climbing on board;. The funding limit of £35,000 for the campaign is already promised. We expect more MPs to come on board. And of course, Mark Oaten withdrew from the race yesterday – and the betting odds have now shortened on Chris to 5-1. So – all to play for!

LABOUR'S FINANCIAL CATASTROPHE – COUNCIL IN THE DOCK AS AUDIT COMMISSION SLAMS COUNCIL OVER £10 MILLION IT OVERSPEND

Posted on by

An astonishingly damning report by the Audit Commission on Haringey Council’s handling of its controversial Tech Refresh project has heavily criticised the Labour-run council.

The shocking report, sent to councillors this week, details a massive £10.6 million projected overspend on the ‘Tech Refresh’ IT project . The overspend alone amountsto some 11% of all the money Haringey charges in Council Tax this year. Tech Refresh was originally due to be completed by October 2004 at a cost of £9 million, and the Audit Commission has written to Haringey setting outits stinging criticism over the Council’s handling of the project.

The Audit Commission’s reportdescribes the failureof Labour-controlled Haringeyin many areasof the project’s development, commenting thatsome project board membersfailed to regularly attend meetings andthat there was inadequatemonitoring by Corporate Finance of either budget setting or budgetary control.

What has really alarmed the Lib Dem opposition is the criticism of the Labour-run Council for showing little evidence of ‘timely, transparent and accurate reporting of project slippages and overspends’ or ‘clear audit trails’.

Haringey’s ruling Labour councillors, supposedly in charge, did little or nothing to address the problems. Lib Dems also say that they have been giving misleading answers by Labour bosses about the scale of the disaster. In the most recent case, Cllr David Winskill, who is one of the Council’sOverview and Scrutiny Board members , requested details from the Executive Member for Organisational Development, Cllr Takki Sulaiman, at a scrutiny meeting last Octoberaboutthe original Tech Refresh budget, what the current budget is and how any “potential slippage” will impact the budget.

To Cllr Winskill’s amazement, Cllr Sulaiman claimed that the current budget was £5.5 million and the original budget was just £5 million. Yet, by then, Haringey Council knew of the scale of the problems. Cllr Neil Williams is writing to the Council and the Audit Commission to raise this and many other concerns.

Cllr Neil Williams (Highgate) comments:

“The staggering scale of the mismanagement of this project and its extraordinary cost, simply beggars belief. There is no doubt also that there has been a catalogue of attempts, at almost every level, to conceal the scale of this financial catastrophe for the Council. Costscould escalate further. Haringey Labour must be held to account for this utter shambles.”

Cllr David Winskill (Crouch End) adds.

“This whole project has been a fiasco and the Haringey Executive should hang its head in shame. I will be asking Overview and Scrutiny to demand that Cllr Sulaiman comes and explains his grossly misleading answers to my questions. I feel that there should be a full review of this project to see whether it is capable of delivering what it was originally intended to do. I wonder if we have passed the point where we are now throwing good money after bad.”

Positive role models

Posted on by

Morning went to the start of an all day event / seminar by Friendship Global – titled ‘Peace, Friendship and the 2012 Olympics’. This is a group started in Haringey by the suggestion of two little girls who after 9/11 wanted to do something to stop such terrible things happening again. So their father started this peace group – where the basic idea is that through friendship we can stop wars.

From there I went straight to make a speech and give out awards at the Haringey African and Afro-Caribbean Awards for excellence. A huge hall full of children and their proud families thronging the Alexandra Palace. Now, as much as they all obviously loved me – I can’t help thinking that myself and George Meehan (Labour councillor) were not the main attractions. Kwame and Lemar (spelling of both iffy) were the main event. After my speech – Kwame and myself gave out the first batch of around 30 awards. I felt the kids would feel cheated if they came up on stage for their award and they just got it from me rather than him – so made sure they all got to shake hands and have a quick word with him.

I had to leave before Lemar did his bit – but the screams and clapping when he came in were pretty impressive. I thought the whole event was fantastic. So much negative stuff about black under-achievement – and so great to have an occasion celebrating the positive. I am absolutely committed to aspiration and inspiration. If you are treated like a failure – you will fail. It isn’t rocket science – and this was positivism in action.

The evening took me to Holborn & St Pancras where I was a panel guest on a Question Time format for the University of London with students from London’s universities come to grill us. Slightly to my surprise, they didn’t ask about ID cards or civil liberties. They did ask about taxation. They did ask about cannabis. They didn’t ask that much about the environment. They did ask about the Lid Dem leadership. They did ask about smoking bans. They did laugh when I told them that I once went barefoot and wore flowers in my hair! What’s so funny?! Anyway – I had good fun as I took a bit of license and went way off message. Well – a bit of blue skies thinking is always good for the soul.

Violent Crime Reduction Bill

Posted on by

The Violent Crime Reduction Bill has been working its way through Parliament. Lynne Featherstone has led for the Liberal Democrats on the bill in the House of Commons. In this article she explains what the party’s line has been and why

There is a limit to what legislation can achieve – this Bill deals with the symptoms of the dreadful malaise that stalks (mainly) our young people – some of whom drink to oblivion and some of whom in believe that carrying a weapon makes you cool. So we should be realistic about the limits of legislation to change the world. But that said, the Liberal Democrats are right behind the Government on the overall aims of the Violent Crime Reduction Bill (not too often you can say that!). I may well have been very critical of some of the detail – and am very critical of the way they may use the new powers – but drink-fuelled problems and gun and knife crime need tackling.

Drink Banning Orders – introduced by the Bill – are a bit akin to parents grounding their children: a short sharp punishment which would stop them from being able to go to their favourite pub or club for a couple of months. Orders will enable the police and local authorities to stop an individual coming into a certain area because of their “criminal or disorderly behaviour”.

The trouble, as ever, with Labour legislation is that it is overweening and undefined – it could easily be abused. The bill uses the term “disorder”. One Labour MP seemed to think that running down a street and calling to a friend would be enough to constitute disorder! This is very broad and open to abuse. Labour has listened a little to critics – including a welcome concession that you can’t be jailed simply for breaking a drink banning order. Even this Labour Government realised that to end up with a five year prison sentence for skipping down the street drunk and shouting might be seen as a little over the top! But there are still plenty of other concerns left.

As for Alcohol Disorder Zones (ADZs) – these are areas that can be designated by a local authority and the police where there are large amounts of trouble from drinking establishments. The idea is that establishments within the zone to be designated have an opportunity to put forward a voluntary action plan, and if it works the zone isn’t imposed. But if it fails, it is – and imposition includes the power to charge establishments for extra policing or whatever.

Given we agree with the principle of the “polluter” pays this is ok in principle, but good landlords are treated the same as bad in the plans (and if the bad don’t play ball, the good have to pay the bill too), there are perverse incentives for local authorities to view this as a way of raising money, designating an area will stigmatise it (or even worse, glorifying it for some?), and many, many other arguments of detail.

The Government seem not to be interested in anything other than sloganeering that “we serve the lawful and that this legislation is targeted on the lawless”. Well yes – statement of the bleeding obvious in terms of what everyone wants as an outcome. But slogans aren’t the same as effective action. We already have so much legislation that the Government is not using properly regarding drinking and alcohol. It is already illegal to sell drink to the drunk (they virtually never prosecute). Local Authorities can revoke licenses (they rarely do). And there are the brand new powers for the police to shut down premises. But saying we want a new law gets cheap publicity points in a way that working to use existing laws properly don’t!

The other parts of the Bill are mainly about weapons. Basically the Bill, quite rightly, seeks to address the rise in knife crime and the use of imitation weapons along with some new limits on legal weapons.

During the course of the passage of the Bill we sought to address the rise in knife crime. We tabled an amendment that would have imposed an equal sentence on carrying a knife as a gun. You are equally dead if murdered by a knife as a gun – so we are seeking parity of sentence (and the increase in gun sentences does seem to have had an impact). Unfortunately, Labour voted against increasing the charge for carrying a knife – something to remind the public about in our leaflets!

Labour also have a measure in the Bill which raises the age from 16 to 18 for purchasing or selling a knife. But there is no description as to what sort of knife – which leaves the unsatisfactory position of being able to get married and have children at 16 but not buy cutlery!

So the Bill, supported by both Lib Dems and Tories, now goes on its way to the Lords. The measures will curb some of the excesses we all hope – but we all know that deep down this Bill just doesn’t begin to address what lies beneath: what is the root cause of the disaffection of our young people so that they drink themselves stupid and aspire to carrying weapons? That is the nut we have to really crack.

This article first appeared in Liberal Democrat News.

Leadership

Posted on by

So now it’s our turn for a new dawn. I guess all parties have to regenerate and reinvent as the political landscape shifts.

As we Liberal Democrats pick ourselves up and dust ourselves off my hope and expectation is that out of this pretty traumatic time, we will emerge ready to meet the new challenges. I am convinced that the right path is to stay true to our values and beliefs.

For all the talk about the dangers of the Lib Dems being squeezed, I’m actually very optimistic. Both Tories and Labour seem to be moving into competing on very narrow territory – becoming more and more alike, whilst they simply argue over the details of management options within a very restricted framework. That leaves an awful lot of scope for another party – especially one which is will to stick to its core beliefs.

This is a time when liberalism is needed more than ever – to stand against Labour’s assault on our civil liberties, our ancient freedoms and rights; to stand against illegal wars; to stand against an creeping authoritarianism where sound-bite punishments are meant to solve society’s ills. And to show a real commitment to the environment – as something crucial to our future, not just a fig leave to be picked up and discarded as the whims of focus groups and opinion polls take you.

As for public services in the round – well, the liberal response is to argue for quality public services for all, locally delivered and locally accountable. Quality services for all is important, because the current favourite mantra of “choice” means putting up with good and bad public services. That’s fine for those who are able to work the system to get their children into the good school or their partner into the good hospital. But what about everyone else?

Locally delivered is important because that’s where many of the services are at their best – such as the local police station where people can easily call in to report crimes or the local hospital which means people’s friends and neighbours can easily visit, offering support and help to patients.

And locally accountable – because that’s how we get better value for the huge sums of money that have been poured into some public services with so little to show for it.

So – four candidates’ hats in the Lib Dem leadership ring. The man who many people initially thought would almost certainly take over and who started as favourite was Sir Menzies Campbell. He’s been displaced as bookies’ favourite by Party President Simon Hughes. Then there is Mark Oaten, Lib Dem Shadow Home Secretary (and my boss in the Home Affairs Team); and my boy – Chris Huhne, who started as a rank outsider at 300-1 with odds now closing at 7-1.

I am supporting Chris because it’s not the office of leader he is interested in for its own sake. He wants to get the Lib Dems into power. And he knows what he wants to do with that power and where he wants to take the party. He has the credibility and substance on economic issues to take the fight to Gordon Brown and beat him on his own territory.

Chris Huhne (www.chris2win.org) has already made clear that a key part of his vision is about using taxation to discourage behaviour which damages our environment, whilst using the money raised that way to take those who are poorest out of taxation all together. So – overall, no increase in taxation, but a fairer society and a better environment for all. Redistribution and responsible consumption in one – that’s the combination that is both liberal and effective. That sounds good to me!

Meeting Ken Livingstone again

Posted on by

Ring Peter Hendy to congratulate him. He has been chosen as the one (out of the two applying) for the job as Transport Commissioner for London, taking over from wiley Kiley. Peter was bus supremo – and we have argued across the transport spectrum for years now. And I still want a full time service on the hard fought for 603! What I always really like about Peter is his hands-on approach.

Whenever I put out a press release that he didn’t like – be it about the ‘free’ bendy buses or the ‘bursting into flames’ bendy buses – or whatever – he would phone me on my mobile and give me hell. Despite our opposite positions – we always got on well and I think he will be a great Commissioner. Look forward to seeing his negotiating style with the government. And – on the occasions when he was wrong – eventually he would admit I was right.

My favourite was over AVL – the system of countdown which tells passenger when the bus will be along and is plotted on a computer. Terrible system – never worked properly. I always told Peter that it was pointless finishing implementing an outmoded useless system across the rest of London (it was half in). Have to say – gave me great pleasure the day he told me I had been right all along. Anyway – he is a good thing and I hope to see London improve under his stewardship.

Sonia from the LSE is shadowing me today as part of ‘LSE Women in Westminster’. She and Mette, my researcher, come to Home Affairs Team meeting. We always run through all the Home Affairs Bills with each of the team responsible for that Bill – both Lords and Commons. Mark Oaten (Shadow Home Secretary) heads the team. Updates on Religious Hatred Bill – coming back for another row I think to the Commons soon; ID cards in trouble for the Government – as may be the Terror Laws soon. The Government seem to be having a go at getting back to 60 days on detention without charge. I trust the Lords will stick to the 28 we conceded in the Commons.

Rush off to Prime Ministers’ Questions (PMQs) next. Will Ming pass the test? Well – his question was on the Soham murders – so the House fell silent. And he was absolutely fine – not that in my view PMQs should have any sway. It’s just a blood sport. I do wonder why jeering, leering and making rude gestures is rated so highly by the boys and the media!

I race to City Hall for a London Day event with my old sparring partner – Ken Livingstone. He gives me a double peck on the cheek and I observe that he is clearly missing me since I left. He denies this assertion and tells me what a terrible thing we have done to that nice Charles. And what’s wrong with a drink anyway? Well – this from the man who claims to get bored at parties and only drank three glasses of chardonnay! Hey, Ho.

The lunch was fine – and then Ken orated. He is a good speaker – something to do with nasal tones and trying to shock. I learned a lot from Ken during my five years as an Assembly Member (only the good bits) so have a lot to thank him for in as much as I learned to keep in mind when I speak the audience outside the room as well as those present. And to be direct!

Ken wittered on for some time about water and desalination – but his surprise announcement was his endorsement of Simon Hughes as LibDem leader. Not sure if that’s the kiss of death for Simon!

ALARM EXPRESSED OVER MANAGER EXODUS FROM SHELTERED HOUSING

Posted on by

Lib Dem councillors have called on Haringey Council to urgently fill vacant scheme manager positions at a number of Sheltered Housing Schemes across the borough, following revelations that five full-time managers have been moved to become part of a new specialist team in Housing in preparation for the ALMO starting in April.

Lib Dem Muswell Hill ward Councillor Gail Engert was initially alerted earlier this month when she heard that a local resident was enquiring why the scheme manager at The Priory, Priory Road N8, had left and there was no replacement.

Cllr Engert immediately contacted the Council to look into what was happening.

Meanwhile, she visited Cranley Dene Court, another Sheltered Housing Scheme, in Muswell Hill where she found that their full-time scheme manager had also left to join Housing. She heard from some of the elderly residents that they were very concerned that they no longer had a manager and were ‘worried and frightened’ about what would happen in the future. They also told her that all they were now being provided with was a short morning visit by an area relief manager and emergency cords in the properties.

Tenants claim that they are not being kept informed of plans and felt that their fees for the scheme includes provision of a full-time manager. Cllr Engert was also told that in all five full-time managers had been moved, four from schemes in the west of the borough and one from the east, and this was causing alarm among current tenants.

Haringey Council has confirmed that five managers have been moved. The Council have also assured Cllr Engert that all residents were informed of these changes and that it will make little difference to the service provision. However Cllr Engert and Social Services spokesperson Cllr Wayne Hoban, say that correspondence and meetings with the residents affected tell a very different story and they want full-time managers re-instated immediately.

Cllr Engert (Muswell Hill) comments:

“Residents I have spoken to feel vulnerable without an onsite manager and have claimed they were not adequately informed about the changes or what will happen in the future. I along with my Lib Dem colleagues will be pressing for an urgent solution to this very unsatisfactory situation.”

Cllr Hoban (Alexandra) adds:

“Social Services continue to make great claims about their improvements, but this situation once again raises questions about the Council’s ability to consult with and provide a satisfactory level of service for a vulnerable section of our community.”

LIB DEMS WELCOME ANOTHER LABOUR CLIMB DOWN

Posted on by

Lib Dems have welcomed a spectacular u-turn from Haringey Labour over a controversial plan to spend £400,000 of Council Tax money on publicity for its Better Haringey PR campaign – much of it in the run up to this year’s local elections. The move follows questions and concerns raised by the Lib Dems over the issue in recent months.

Lib Dem Leader Neil Williams comments:

“I am delighted that Labour has been force to back down on this silly proposal. Such a huge budget for self congratulatory PR from Labour would have been a gross waste of Council Taxpayers’ money. Proper information for residents on recycling and other environment services is needed, but not this huge sum of money claiming how well the council is doing. It is a victory for common sense.”

Haringey Labour are now trying to pretend that this proposal never existed, proving that they are either in complete disarray over their running of the Council or are trying to mislead Haringey residents.

Cllr Matt Davies, who sits on the Overview & Scrutiny Committee which first saw this budget proposal, comments:

“For Labour to say that they never had any plans to double this budget is at best misleading. This proposal was considered in the budget scrutiny process and I had my opposition to this huge sum of money officially minuted.

“The Labour councillors on the committee all agreed that the proposal to double the budget should be passed. For the Labour Executive Member to say now that there were never any plans to increase this budget is a disgraceful attempt to cover-up the u-turn we have forced.”

STROUD GREEN: LIB DEM LAURA SHOCKED BY COUNCIL'S CPZ DECISION

Posted on by

Lib Dem councillor for Stroud Green, Laura Edge has written to Haringey Council to express her deep concern at its decision to extend parking restrictions to 8.30am-6.30pm Monday to Saturday in the Finsbury Park area, and to include Oakfield Road, N4 in the CPZ.

The decision was made at the Council’s Executive meeting last month and despite Cllr Edge’s involvement in the consultation process as ward councillor, Haringey Council failed to send her a copy of the report prior to the meeting.

One of the main concerns Cllr Edge has lies with the potential impact on the local economy that the CPZ could have, with many shoppers opting to shop in other areas with car parking, rather than spend time finding a parking space amongst all the restrictions. She is also concerned at the amount of bureaucracy faced by local residents in getting visitors’ permits and alike and does not understand why the Council could not have imposed a two-hour restriction in the middle of the day to deter commuter parking.

Furthermore, Cllr Edge is angry at the news that Oakfield Road has been included in the CPZ plans. Having turned down proposals for an extension of the CPZ to cover their road, residents were re-consulted by the Council. They were given to understand that this was a statutory consultation in case an extension of the scheme was later approved by residents and that the scheme would not go ahead at the present time if residents voted against it once again.

Cllr Edge who has been contacted by a number of concerned residents in the area is awaiting a response from the Council.

Cllr Edge comments:

“I am deeply concerned at the Council’s handling of the consultation and its failure to keep me informed. This CPZ could be detrimental to the regeneration of this part of the borough and is being imposed in Oakfield Road against the will of residents. I will be looking at what options are available to fight this decision.”

Prostitution

Posted on by

Meeting in the morning at Jacksons Lane Community Centre followed by Parliament. Had long interview for Liberal Democrat News followed by one for Hansard Society – who are following a few MPs and interviewing them three times over their first year. Little huddles from the various leadership camps can be seen in every corner. Guess and hope it will all revert to normal after the competition finishes.

I’m handling prostitution today – so to speak. The Government announces its policy – no surprises there. They will crackdown on kerb crawlers (for crackdown read displace). They will allow two prostitutes to work together from premises – but not regulate or license saunas or brothels. They will educate girls that it’s not a good idea to become a sex worker. As usual with Labour – all sound-bite and no solution.

Firstly – the bit about two working girls being able to operate from a flat or whatever does nothing to separate out the prostitutes from the residents. And it’s the residents who don’t want the business on their doorstep for the nuisance, the intimidation and because if they have children it’s not nice – not to put too fine a point on it.

Secondly, their big idea is to take driving licenses away from kerb-crawling men. Hardly a convincing measure. And the insult to injury I think is whilst they talk about educating girls not to go into the business – not a dickie bird about the dicks – i.e. educating boys to behave responsibly and to respect women.

Moreover – it’s a lost opportunity. Lots of good pilots in other cities with ‘managed’ zones where away from residential areas prostitutes can ply their trade between certain hours. Keep girls safe and supervised care for the health side of the business too. That’s being tried in Liverpool. In Edinburgh – although not an official zone – for some time the ‘area’ was out at the docks. Same principle – deal with the issue, the health and safety and the nuisance to others – and regulate the saunas etc where currently the police de facto ignore well-behaved saunas and establishments.

It’s our Opposition Day today in Parliament – which means the Liberal Democrats get to chose what is debated. Our two motions are the Child Support Agency (CSA) followed by nuclear energy – both explosive! Alone in the lobbies – our motions were defeated. Still it’s good to be on the side of the angels.