People switching from Labour

Posted on by

A week or so ago I got a call from a Labour member in Stroud Green ward saying that he and quite a few people around where he lived were thinking not only of voting for the Lib Dems in the coming election – but perhaps actively going out and campaigning for us when the election is called. However, they wanted to ‘interview’ me as the Prospective Parliamentary Candidate to make sure I was – whatever.

He assured me it would not be an ‘interrogation’ but just that they didn’t know me and wanted to check out some issues with me.

I took Laura Edge with me as she is the Lib Dem councillor in Stroud Green ward (elected with a massive swing from Labour in the January 2004 by-election – 29% swing!).

I suppose there are about ten people there when we arrive – and they certainly put me through my paces. The key issues appeared to be Iraq, Control Orders, PPP for the tube and many, many others. I just answered directly – my thoughts. My late mother’s advice to me in all things was ‘be yourself’. So I was.

I recognise that many Lib Dem policies and positions at the moment resonate with Labour members and voters. This is not because of any change in Liberal Democracy – it is because Labour has moved. I am not a socialist but much of the rest of politics has moved so far to the right, that many people now find the Liberal Democrats closest to their own views.

One issue that was causing anxiety was the possibility that if they voted Lib Dem it might let a Tory in. No chance in Hornsey & Wood Green. The Tory candidate has even said publicly that the election is a very close contest between Labour and the Lib Dems.

Moreover, there are a couple of Labour websites that have sprung up to advise disaffected Labour voters where it is safe to vote away from Labour. In Hornsey & Wood Green the sites advocate voting Lib Dem completely safely:

www.strategicvoter.org.uk says, “Vote for the best-placed candidate from an anti-war party, which in this seat means LibDem … You are in a vital battleground constituency where you have a real chance of getting someone from an anti-war party elected.”

www.sonowwhodowevotefor.net says the sitting Labour MP, having voted for the war in Iraq, tuition fees and foundation hospitals, is “part of the problem” and urges visitors to back the Lib Dems instead.

I very much enjoyed meeting this Labour group this morning. There are some differences inevitably – but I was greatly impressed by their commitment and engagement in the political process – and that they cared so passionately about a variety of issues they were prepared to be active to deliver an outcome.

After a two-hour ‘grilling’ (not really) I sneak a quick lunch with my friend Jenny. Don’t tell my campaign manager!

Then campaigning in the afternoon followed by a campaign team meeting at my house. All the ward organisers for the campaign come and we run through the programme and update on where we all are with our various tasks. We are all trying to do so much – and getting it mostly done. It is a fantastic team of people who are determined to give it their best!

Campaigning in Woodside

Posted on by

Special campaign action day in Woodside ward (Hornsey & Wood Green). We all swing in to action to get leaflets out – and some of us, including me, go door knocking. Previously a hard Labour area – but definitely going our way judging by the softness of the Labour vote.

I met only one Conservative couple who said that as the Tories didn’t have a prayer in Hornsey & Wood Green they would vote Lib Dem too.

Then catch up on emails and letters. There is a steep increase in correspondence and emails asking for political positions on a variety of issues and all of the questionnaires to Prospective Parliamentary Candidates have started to arrive.

Future of Red Gables

Posted on by

Off to meet parents and children at Red Gables – a special facility in Crouch End for children with particular needs.

Red Gables is a local success story helping children and parents and doing a great job. So of course, Labour want to close it. Lib Dem colleague Cllr Ron Aitken spotted this in the mountain of papers we get (for meetings we are not allowed to speak at). He contacted the parents and with local resident Sue Hessel brought it into the public forum. At council we have a deputation led by Sue and a motion moved by Ron.

It’s becoming quite a hot issue, with Labour not playing straight with residents about what their plans really are for Red Gables.

Bob Kiley's pay

Posted on by

Rush outside after Transport Committee to do a TV snippet on Bob Kiley’s bonus and Oystercard.

Liberal Democrats finally got the figures and performance criteria of London’s traffic supremo – only thanks to our request under the Freedom of Information Act. Mind you, I think it should be a matter of public record – after all Londoners are all paying!

Mr Kiley gets a basic of £312,000 per annum. And over the last two years, in each year he got a bonus of £275,000 (96% of the full bonus) and this year is expected to get as much as £365,000 bonus.

The criteria for the pay are extremely vague, flabby and flawed. For a start – we have no idea what Mr Kiley is meant to do for his basic salary. I would have thought quite a lot for that amount. And yet in the performance criteria we find things he has to deliver like increased bus mileage and reduced congestion. ‘Scuse me – given the amount of extra buses we have all paid for over the last few years it would be a bit of a shock if bus mileage hadn’t increased. Ditto for reducing congestion – with the Congestion Charge it seems to me that was the main point.

Another strand of Bob’s bonus is helping to get borrowing from the government. This he has certainly delivered on and without Kiley I don’t think the government would have trusted Ken to borrow money. Budgeting is not his strong point…

However – Lib Dems will now pursue what we should have got for our money out of Mr Kiley’s basic salary and somewhat more specific targets for a bonus.

Call me old-fashioned – but I always thought a bonus was for doing extra well – not simply doing your job!

And of course the other biggy of the day was Oystercard packing up across London this morning. It wasn’t down for long – but it’s a good example of how things can go catastrophically wrong. (A corrupted disk Tim O’Toole had said in committee when I asked him to make a statement.)

Imagine if TfL had advanced the dream at this stage of everyone getting rid of their small change because you could buy bread and milk on Oystercard. Doris would have gone thirsty and hungry this morning.

After a Metropolitan Police Authority meeting, I rush to Transport for London to see Peter Hendy – supremo of all transport that runs on the surface of London.

This visit is about the Croydon Tram. There is a row between the guys running it and Transport for London. The people running the tram seem to believe that TfL may be trying to put them out of business by running competing bus routes. TfL think this is rubbish.

Peter (who is pretty robust) seems quite open to any suggestion from Croydon Tramlink about a way forward – but he certainly needs something from them on the table before any rescue plan could be brought forth.

And in the evening: with an election just around the corner – I do some telephoning!

Should the Northern Line be shut?

Posted on by

The tube! I am chairing the London Assembly’s Transport Committee this morning and Tim O’Toole came in to give evidence – Managing Director of London Underground (LU) for Transport for London – followed by the hard men of the private companies – the Chief Execs of Tubelines and Metronet.

There was recently an explosive exchange of bad will in the press between LU and the private companies. The Northern Line is failing appallingly and the engineering overruns on a Monday morning are becoming legendary.

Tube users are getting a raw deal. Improvements, such as they are, are small and slow – and some areas are getting worse. These guys – the three of them between them – share the blame.

In the press Tim O’Toole has basically said that the private companies are not putting resources in fast enough and are thinking about their profits (we anti-PPP brigade could have said ‘told you so’!). There is a hint that he believes that the penalties that Metronet are incurring are not high enough and that it may be cheaper for them to overrun on a Monday morning causing misery for those trying to use the tube rather than finish on time.

With regard to the Northern Line – a new proposal from Tubelines made its public debut. It is clear to anyone who uses it twice a day (as I do – and yes I declare a great interest) that radical renewal and repair is called for. Apparently Tubelines have submitted a proposal to LU (Tim) which breaks the line into seven sections. Each section would be closed and totally redone, with the whole line taking about a year. The public will be consulted on this (or told about it) and replacement transport will be provided while each section is shut.

It’s only a proposal – but it’s the only game in town as far as I can see at the moment.

Anyway – there was a bit of a squabble about line closure per se – as this enables the private companies to do their engineering work more quickly and cheaper. Who reaps the financial benefit? LU (and I) think that we (the public) should get a refund on monies saved – but the private companies will undoubtedly find reasons not to pay it.

The other raging battle is over figures and discrepancies. In his media outburst, it was clear that Mr O’Toole believes (and the report to the TfL board says so) that only a tiny percentage of work promised on renewal or repair of stations and escalators etc has taken place. In committee both sides were shirty. I put it to both of them – and they equivocated about interpretation of figures to the point where they could both be right.

Just keep up the pressure – that’s all I can do. The PPP is a dreadful contract and Tim O’Toole is doing a good job considering the pup he’s been sold. I suspect his very public outburst on the performance of private companies came as a result of extreme frustration with a contract that puts him quite squarely between a rock and a hard place.

Tariq Ali and Jesse Jackson

Posted on by

Tariq Ali came to tea. This was following his public statement on TV that he was going to vote Liberal Democrat to oust a pro-war MP – and his advice to others to do likewise where opportunity presented itself. Towards the end of his interview he revealed that the particular pro-war MP he was voting to get out was Hornsey and Wood Green’s Barbara Roche.

So I had written to Tariq to see if there was anything to be done to deliver our joint aim.

He was absolutely charming – and wanted to be as helpful as possible in the cause.

In my student days Tariq Ali was a revolutionary hero. I was on the left of the political spectrum – but just nowhere near as cool as the International Marxist Group.

Strange how life turns out!

In the evening attended an Operation Black Vote rally. I accepted the invitation as a great enthusiast for getting people to vote (obviously) but also particularly because of my concerns about black and minority ethnic groups having a history of non-registration and non-participation.

On the news in the morning I hear that Jesse Jackson is to be speaking at the rally.

Arriving at Friends’ Meeting House (incidentally where my old school had its prize-giving day and where I sat for six years not receiving a prize – until success in my last year) there were queues in the street. The hall was absolutely packed and there was a real buzz in the air.

Ten speakers took to the podium in turn – Simon Woolley (Operation Black Vote), then a series of religious leaders from all the faiths (black and ethnic), then the activists like the 1990’s Trust, Lee Jasper and the like.

I guess out of the one or two thousand people there – there must have been about ten or so white people in the audience. I wish there had been more to hear those speeches – to hear the voices of those who suffer discrimination in our land.

What struck me most (barring one or two remarks) was the lack of bitterness and the kinship fostered between the different ethnic and religious groups.

And then came Jackson. Of course his oratorical skills are greatly heralded, but I had never heard him live before – only the soundbites of television coverage now and again.

It is impossible to describe the power that he exudes with his voice, his delivery, his charisma.

He finished his speech. He then asked the audience to remain in their seats. And he asked if there was (and you have to kind of read this in an American southern accent) anyone over the age of 18 who was not registered to vote. And no one put up their hand. Then he asked again. And one man put up his hand but refused to come down to Jesse to register there and then. Then he asked the audience to put up their hands if they were registered to vote. And most people put up their hands. Then he asked all those who had not put up their hands to come down to him and register. And a couple of people came. And then he asked again. And more came – and then more – and then more.

It really moved me. It may be the technique of the evangelist – and it’s true to say I haven’t witnessed that before. But to see one man draw so many to him and because of him feel safe to register to vote where they hadn’t before was extraordinary.

I came home with much food for thought on all I had heard and seen.

Busy media day

Posted on by

Busy media day today. Splashed across Evening Standard front page is news of a ‘leaked’ document from the Assembly showing the appalling performance to date of the two private companies running the tube – and their manager, Transport for London.

I am really cross as it wasn’t a ‘leaked’ document – it was just the background briefing for members of the Assembly Transport Committee (which I chair) who will be questioning Tim O’Toole (MD of the tube for Transport for London) and the two Chief Execs of the private company on Thursday when they come before me in public session.

Cross – because the witnesses will now be forewarned. We always give them the questions or subjects so that they can prepare their background. However, the point of a public session in scrutiny is to put them on the spot.

Give a long interview to Metro on the failings of the PPP. How long have you got? Late with almost everything they are contracted to do – from over-running engineering to station upgrades.

Thursday’s session should be pretty interesting!

Also the Standard has taken my news release based on figures I have got hold of on how Capita (the Mayor’s favourite contractor administering the congestion charge) has had to pay GBP 4.5 million in fines – that’s GBP 7,400 per day. Even worse – the Mayor is going to extend their existing contract and almost certainly give them the contract for his westward extension to the congestion charge.

Well – given they are still missing 21% of their targets (improved from missing 35% previously) they are hardly going to kill themselves to improve when they know that seemingly whatever their performance they are going to be not only re-employed – but given new contracts.

It’s in the Standard and I do an LBC radio pre-record on the Capita release. Transport for London telephone – absolutely furious. However, the figures came in official Mayoral answers to written questions I had submitted.

Red faces I understand at TfL – they are now saying they gave the wrong figures in the Mayoral answer.

Capita have only had to pay GBP 3.7 million in fines not GBP 4.5 million.

I am sure that makes all the difference – not!

Then – to my surprise – BBC want to tape me talking about Ken’s climbdown over the Royal Ballet School. Happy to oblige. Ken has made a complete arse of himself by trying to use planning consent as a means to engineer his social policies – in this case the real sub-text being a view that a Royal Ballet School in a Royal Park is too posh and elitist.

My understanding is that this is rubbish as any budding Billy Elliott anywhere in the country aspires to come there – whatever the background.

Caught out, Ken is trying to assert that concessions by the school that they will make more strenuous efforts to attract diverse kids is the reason he has now been able to change his mind.

Last media call of the day is about the Parking Enforcement scrutiny I have instigated and been chairing at the London Assembly. We are in the process of writing up the evidence. It has become clear that the report will be ready in time for the April meeting – but if Blair calls the election – it might not be allowed to be published during that period.

There is some ruling somewhere that no one should gain any advantage from its publication. I would argue that it is the normal work of the Assembly and shouldn’t be stopped. I will ask for a legal ruling on this in due course.

Back to Hornsey & Wood Green to whip round to various houses collecting envelopes and then mountain of emails and casework to attend to.

WHAT CHOICE? SECONDARY SCHOOL CRISIS NOW LOOMING IN MUSWELL HILL AREA

Posted on by

Lib Dem councillors are warning that a crisis in provision of secondary school places in the Muswell Hill area is set to follow the crisis in primary places identified in March 2004.

The party says that with offers for year 7 children applying for Haringey secondary schools having gone out on 1 March, figures provided by Haringey Council show an acute lack of places in the west of the Borough.

Under the new Pan-London admissions scheme parents gave preferences from one to six on their application forms. The preferences given show how demand is vastly outstripping supply in the west of the borough. Alexandra Park school is attracting 809 1st, 2nd or 3rd preferences whilst there are only 216 places on offer, with the same figures for Fortismere being 908 1st, 2nd or 3rd preferences for just 243 places.

Even with six choices, Haringey Council admits that “a number of applicants will not be offered any of their preferences.”

Councillor Gail Engert (Muswell Hill ward), Liberal Democrat Education Spokesperson comments:

“Where is the choice much vaunted by Tony Blair and New Labour? A staggering 359 parents chose Fortismere School as their first choice, whilst there are only 243 places. What kind of choice is that? It seems that we now have a crisis over the lack of secondary school places in the Muswell Hill area that is only set to get worse as the children taking up the extra new primary places at Coldfall and Tetherdown schools move through the system.”

Cllr Lynne Featherstone, Lib Dem Parliamentary spokesperson, adds:

“Haringey’s lack of planning over the whole school places issue has been shown up again. Theirs is always a sticking-plaster approach. When one school places problem is tackled, it results in another elsewhere in the system. Only a long-term approach to planning for school places in the Muswell Hill area will move us away from this situation.”

LIB DEMS DEMAND SUSTAINABILITY FOR UDP

Posted on by

The sustainability of Haringey Council’s Unitary Development Plan has been challenged by Liberal Democrat councillors, who have ‘called in’ to the borough’s top watchdog committee the decision by the Labour-controlled Council Executive not to carry out a sustainability audit of the plan until 2007.

Lib Dem environment spokesperson Cllr Bob Hare says it is crucial that sustainability is considered as part of the forthcoming public inquiry into the UDP proposals. He paid tribute to the Federation of Haringey Residents’ Associations, who have also raised the issue.

Bob Hare, formerly the Council’s Environment Officer, says that the UDP is one of the Council’s most fundamental policy documents, and crucial to sustainability and the environment of the borough. The Labour Council’s attempt to look at sustainability in the UDP through an ‘environment report’ has so far been lightweight and sketchy.

Bob Hare comments:

“Haringey Council agreed it would follow best practice in this area and it plainly has not. Their environment report contains little or no detail to back up its assertions. We are asking the Council to commission a proper detailed audit now so that the results can feed into the public inquiry.

“It is very much in the long-term interests of the borough for the Council to do this now – leaving it till after the UDP has been published will be too late. The long-term environmental costs to the borough from not building sustainability into the UDP policies now could be unthinkable.

“Haringey Council has also failed to follow government recommendations that they should provide alternatives to key policies so that the most sustainable choices could be made.”

SATISFACTION OVER FLURRY OF TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS

Posted on by

Liberal Democrats have welcomed a recent increase in applications for Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) to Haringey Council.

The move follows a recent appeal by Lib Dem Parliamentary Spokesperson Lynne Featherstone for local residents to take advantage of the system to ensure that valuable mature trees receive proper protection from the Haringey Council.

Ms Featherstone’s comments followed recent controversy over the fate of trees at the Strathlene House site next to Fortismere School.

Lynne Featherstone comments:

“I am very pleased at these moves to protect mature trees in the borough.

“There had been hardly any Tree Preservation Orders issued in the past 12 months, but now we have the start of what would be a worthwhile effort to protect our trees.

“We will continue to encourage residents to take action to protect trees in Haringey.”