Tag Archives: haringey council

Fair funding for Haringey Schools

Posted on by

Well – finally – on the record – the gross unfairness of the way the Government funds schooling in Haringey. Just briefly – we get about £1183 less per child than neighbouring boroughs like Camden, Hackney and Islington. That is around £35 million a year – or more importantly – if we got fair funding we could have 1021 more teachers (we have 1500) that is 15 per school. Imagine the difference that would make.

You can watch the debate at http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=4948  it starts about two thirds in if you scroll along.

I was so pleased that local school governors, parents, Haringey NUT and the Schools Forum came to actually watch the debate in Parliament. We were also the lead story on BBC London – which is great – because all of this is about not letting the Government sideline Haringey in the current Review of our Dedicated Schools Grant. They ignored the unfairness last time and in fact increased the problem – widening the gap.

Needless to say the Minister refused to give us a categoric assurance that the funding gap would be closed post review, refused our request for a Haringey Representative on the Funding Review Panel, refused to give us emergency funding until the gap is closed. However, she did concede the case that we made and assured us that our voices had been heard.

So – whist fair funding is still a way away – the key thing is – they can’t possibly claim they don’t know how badly Haringey is being affected by this funding unfairness – and they will look extremely bad if they don’t rectify matters.

The Schools Minister has agreed to a meeting with me in a couple of weeks time – so I can take up all the questions in my speech that were left unanswered and push further on the ones that were!

Fair school funding for Haringey

Posted on by

Later today, 4pm in Westminster Hall, I finally get to put Haringey’s case for fair funding to the Minister on the record. This is about the fact that our Haringey children get £1183 less per head than neighbouring boroughs. I have tackled Gordon in PMQs before (he agreed it was an ‘anomaly’), met with now former School’s Minister Jim Knight, raised it in on the floor of the House – but today I have actually secured a debate and the Minister has to respond directly – in public.

The key questions for the Minister to respond to are:

– why does the Government make Haringey pay our school teachers at the higher inner London rate (rightly as we have the same challenges as Camden, Hackney and Islington) but then not award them inner London per pupil funding?

– given that this unfair funding  has gone of for some years and civil servants have clearly not seen fit to do anything about rectifying this situation and may be tempted to once again fail to address this situation, what case will the Minister be making to the current Review into school funding, that will ensure Haringey don’t come out the other end of the Review in the same unfair position?

– the Review will not report until later in 2010 and its findings won’t be implemented until 2011. Haringey schools in recent figures released to David Laws, LibDem Education Spokesperson showed that Haringey, together with three other authorities, have more schools in deficit than anywhere else in the country. Given that this unfair funding is now causing real damage, will the Minister commit to making an interim bridging fund of £1000 per Haringey child until the funding anomaly is corrected in the Review.

This video demonstrates the situation in brief – but was filmed just before I heard I had secured the debate:

You can also watch it on YouTube here.

TfL, Haringey PCT and me

Posted on by

Lynne Featherstone, Cllr Martin Newton and London Assembly Member, Caroline PidgeonFinally I managed to get Transport for London (TfL), Haringey PCT and me together in the same place to discuss the need for local people to be able to access services at the new Community Health Centre at Hornsey Hospital.

We have this wonderful new facility – which we all hope is going to be filled with services that local people will access – making life much easier for all. Fly in the ointment is that despite this being raised as a key issue at every public meeting (and all the private ones I have had with TfL or the PCT) nothing has been planned or delivered – or even promised for the future.

And of course – now the new Health Centre is here – and operational. But not a new bus in sight. Loads of people joined in my campaign for a new bus – or more accurately bus links that would enable them to access the new centre – when referred there from wherever they live in Highgate, Crouch End, Muswell Hill, Fortis Green and Alexandra.

When the original hospital closed – they took away the W2 – but as it stood as of Friday – there were no plans for any new services at all. For the years of planning and campaigning that everyone has been involved in – it was always going to be needed – so imagine my shock – when at this meeting, which I had convened, TfL said they had no idea that there were services being (and much more to be) provided that would bring people from all over the West of Hornsey & Wood Green to the new Centre when they were referred on by their GP etc. TfL seemed to have thought that all that was happening was that the two GP practises had moved in and only they would need transport.

To be honest – I couldn’t believe it!

Given the promises on transport, the supposed discussions on transport – to be sitting there listening to the two key agencies basically saying that there was such a gap in communication that TfL didn’t know that there was an ongoing and expanding need for access to the site from provision of new services on the site was truly shocking?

I don’t know what the hell has been going on – but I will be writing to the Chair of Haringey PCT, Haringey Council and Peter Hendy (Commissioner of Transport in London) to bring this smartly to their attention.

Coming out of this ‘discovery’ the agreement was that TfL would now, in its new informed position, take away the issue and look at it. Haringey PCT would provide them with the report from the early transport study they commissioned (unbelievable that they hadn’t provided it already), their green travel plan (can’t imagine what that is if it doesn’t beg the question of public transport access). The PCT would provide some mapping – showing where GP surgeries are and where patients live – and therefore the gaps in public transport access to link into a route that serves the site.

At least they now both seem to understand there is a problem with providing a major new health facility with no transport provision. TfL kept saying it was well served by buses already – but then given they seem to have only been looking at the W7 trundling regularly in both directions between Crouch End, Park Road (where the health centre is) and Muswell Hill – they clearly haven’t even thought about other links at all.

I had been contacted by many local people on the back of our campaign to improve bus links to Hornsey. I can give you a couple of the examples from groups who have also backed this campaign which illustrate the point pretty clearly  I think. One local organisation who have moved into the new facility already and whose clients will commonly have reduced mobility – albeit still very capable of getting on a bus if it can deliver them near to the health centre. They are concerned about how their patients will get to them. Also another professional who has contact with people with very differing needs in the borough writes to me that a number of people she is in contact with through her work have mentioned their concerns about the lack of usable transport links to the new site. They were told by the Chair at the Mobility Forum that this wasn’t a pressing problem as there were only two GP practises present on the site.

Clearly – this is a mess – and I just hope that both Haringey PCT and TfL sort it out now they have acknowledged that they haven’t even been looking at the right problem

On a better note – Haringey PCT thought that any transport provision to get to services, for example, that had previously been provided by the Whittington that might in future be provided by the Health Centre, if NHS transport had been used to transport people to their hospital appointment – that same provision should hopefully be switched to the new facility. They will pursue that.

But then, to add insult to injury – and despite the consultation on moving the critical bus stop on Muswell Hill only just having finished – TfL now say that they can’t see where to accommodate the move onto the flat of the Broadway or the roundabout. They say it’s up to Haringey Council to decide if they want to do something up at the roundabout. It’s so easy (and much cheaper) for TfL to say ‘not me gov’ – over to the Council or over to the PCT. And of course – in turn I have no doubt that the PCT and Haringey Council will say that it is TfL. So round and round that goes – with no one taking responsibility for ensuring that people can access the one bus that does go to the hospital direct from Muswell Hill – but which because it is sited on a steep, steep hill – is a hazard for those who are mobility impaired, mothers with buggies, wheelchair users and the older resident. To be continued…….

Haringey Council attacked for lack of aspiration over new homes

Posted on by

Haringey Council has today come under attack by Haringey Liberal Democrats for its lack of ambition for new council housing in the borough after it was revealed that it failed to apply for extra funding to build new council houses.

The revelation came in the response to a direct plea for Haringey from local MP, Lynne Featherstone, to the Housing minister as soon as it was discovered Haringey was omitted from the September announcement.

Under the scheme six London boroughs shared grants worth £28.5m to build 322 homes – money Haringey had no chance of winning because of its not applying for the scheme.

Commenting, Lynne Featherstone MP says:

“Haringey obviously meets the need threshold, it’s a shame its leaders do not meet the aspiration threshold.

“Time and time again this Labour-run council fails to make the case to its own Government for Haringey. We see this with unfair funding for schools and now with housing.

“I desperately hope they will get their act together to apply for the second round of funding before it is too late.”

Cllr Matt Davies, Haringey Liberal Democrat Housing Spokesperson, adds:

“This news comes as a bitter blow in the fight for better housing for our borough. It is sad to learn that Haringey Council is not seizing every opportunity to address the chronic housing shortage in our area.”

Calls for Housing Cabinet member to apologise as auditors sent in

Posted on by

Labour’s Cabinet member for Housing, Cllr John Bevan, is facing growing pressure to make a public apology for misrepresenting leaseholders in the ongoing issue of £1000+ bills for the installation of digital aerials.

At last week’s Annual General Meeting of the Haringey Leaseholders’ Association (HLA) it was confirmed that the HLA had never voted in favour of Haringey Council’s expensive digital aerials scheme despite Cllr Bevan saying publicly that they had.

Cllr Bevan publicly stated, at Full Council on 19th October 2009 and at the special meeting of the Council’s ‘watchdog’ committee on 1st October 2009, that leaseholders in fact voted for the scheme. Cllr Bevan was not at the AGM, but attended a previous HLA meeting in February 2009 where leaseholders voted in favour of an opt-out from the digital aerials scheme.

Local Liberal Democrats are calling for a public apology from Cllr Bevan to set the record straight.

Opposition housing spokesperson Cllr Matt Davies, who attended the HLA meeting on Thursday 22nd October 2009, comments:

“The Chair of the HLA asked the meeting to agree the minutes from February, which clearly state that leaseholders voted for an opt-out from the digital aerial scheme. She also asked all those present who had been at the previous meeting to confirm that this was an accurate recollection and not one single person has the same memory of the meeting as Cllr Bevan.

“Cllr Bevan must now apologise to the HLA as he was clearly mistaken. It is not surprising leaseholders get such a raw deal from Haringey if even when Labour try to listen they only hear what they want to hear.”

With the huge cost of digital aerials not the only complaints being raised by leaseholders with Councillors and Liberal Democrat MP Lynne Featherstone, further questions are being asked about how Haringey bills leaseholders.

Lynne Featherstone, MP for Hornsey and Wood Green, comments:

“It is unbelievable that Cllr Bevan has so far refused to correct his statements or apologise. He must do so immediately. It is typical of Haringey Labour that they feel they can just say what they like and ignore leaseholders – treating them like a piggy-bank they can just smash open whenever they want.

“After personally hearing so many serious concerns raised individually by leaseholders, I have asked the auditors to look at how Haringey gets money from leaseholders. I will also be meeting with the HLA to discuss their concerns as a group and would encourage any other leaseholders who have complaints about their bills to contact me. We will not be letting this drop.”

Fair Funding debate – at last!

Posted on by

I was telephoned by the Speaker’s Office this afternoon with glad tidings. I have succeeded in getting an Adjournment debate on Fair Funding in Haringey Schools. It is scheduled for next Wednesday. Hurrah!

For anyone who doesn’t know – my campaign to get fair funding for Haringey schoolchildren came about because currently the funding is diabolically unfair. Even Gordon Brown, when I quizzed him a while back at Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs), agreed it was an ‘anomoly’.

This ‘anomoly’ arises out of the injustice of us (Haringey) having to pay inner London teacher salaries but only receiving outer London per pupil funding. The differential is stark. Our kids each get £1,183 less than children in Camden, Hackney or Islington.

Haringey Council, Haringey NUT and the schools are now all supporting fair funding for Haringey Schools.

I’ve raised the issue not only in Prime Minister’s Questions, but also on the floor of the House, had two meetings with the former Schools Minister Jim Knight (it’s a pain when the Minster changes – which he has). I have a request into the new Minister, Vernon Coaker, for a meeting too.

Now – at last – I have scored an Adjournment Debate. It will last half an hour – and it will be just myself and then the Minister will answer.

To date – the answers and meetings have generally ended with the Government saying that the Funding Review will take care of this – a funding review that won’t introduce whatever its recommended new funding is until 2011. I lobbied for Haringey to have specific representation on the Review Panel – but they refused and they have also refused so far to give a guarantee that we will receive fair funding in the Review.

I have heard other Members in the House raise the issue of differentials they experience in their constituencies – but the last one last week was around a £350 differential – which is bad – but our differential of £1183 is killing.

Our teachers do a brilliant job trying to deliver the absolute best education with the budget they have. However, there were some recent figures that showed that Haringey had the most or nearly the most schools in deficit. The Heads are struggling to try not to make any reductions in the staffing – but clearly with such a huge loss of funding around £32 million per year – it is getting impossible. Just imagine the difference that money would make.

I am emailing all my schools to ask them to let me know their particular situation and how the under-funding is affecting them – so I can illustrate the argument with the facts on the ground.

Hopefully we will get it through to the Government that this is just not fair. Our schools are struggling terribly with their budgets – and if ‘every child matters’ how come our children don’t matter as much as them next door?

Serious Case Reviews – Baby Peter and beyond

Posted on by

I have been trying, ever since Baby Peter’s tragic case, to get the Serious Case Review published. A Serious Case Review (SCR) is produced after any such case by the agencies involved in that child’s care. It tells the chronological story of who did what and when. It is an invaluable document – but it is kept secret. An Executive Summary is published – but that really doesn’t tell anything like the whole story.

I have been battling to change this – so that SCR’s can be published. In Baby Peter’s case I have asked the Information Commissioner to publish the SCR for Baby Peter. I don’t believe that the ambition of that over-used phrase ‘lessons must be learned’ can ever be fully realised if the causes and actions are hidden.

The Information Commissioner came back to me to ask for more information as to why I thought it would be in the public interest for the SCR to be published. I sent him my reasons – which I paste below – and now the Information Commissioner is going back to Haringey Council for further information. This was my email to the Commissioner:

Having been Leader of the Opposition on Haringey Council when Victoria Climbie died and now MP in half of Haringey during the Baby P tragedy – I have come to the conclusion that a contributing factor to cases like these (and others) is the secrecy, the closing ranks culture and the lack of transparency.

The Serious Case Review (version 1) which I was allowed to read virtually under lock and key in the Department of Education (where I could not make notes or record any part of the document) was an eye opener to me. The executive summary of the same document which is published did not reflect the key problems, in my view, that were at least part-causal in the eventual tragedy.

The thing that struck me most was the litany of casualness with which people did their jobs (appointments missed, not followed up; files lost, handovers not done, meetings not attended). There was a litany of failures like these at every level, virtually by every person and every agency. I think that most people would expect that once a child is on the protection register and their case being brought to the Safeguarding Board – that there would be a rigour about all aspects connected with them.

This casualness and lack of care is only really demonstrated if you get to read the whole document. It does not come through in the summary and itself is cumulatively causal in my view.

Literally hundreds of professionals across the country emailed me about their knowledge and experience – as did the general public. I believe that the phrase which is dragged out ‘lessons will be learned’ won’t be fully possible if the facts of the case and the failures in the case are kept hidden. As I say, the Executive Summary, does not reveal the extent of the small, but cumulative failures – which I believe many professionals would recognise in their own fields and therefore be able to do something about. Therefore it must be in the public interest to be able to see the whole document.

Simply issuing another 150 Laming-like recommendations every time a tragedy happens simply adds procedures that take professionals away from their work without ever being able to see the why and wherefore of such recommendations – nor to judge or be able to critique the new ways from an informed position. The issues are kept between local authority, the other agencies and the Government – so keeping out those who would, could and should benefit from reading the whole story.

I am not an expert nor a professional – but unless and until we really open out all the issues around cases such as these – there will continue to be an air of defensiveness and self-protection which work against the safety and well-being of children at risk.

Social workers need to work in an atmosphere of support and good management – which can only come from opening up the real events, letting them stand there for all to see – and those in the professions taking those lessons away.

The argument Ed Balls makes to me against publishing the Serious Case Review (s) is that staff would not speak freely if they knew that what they said might be published. My view is that anyone working in any field where there is such an event has a duty to speak and say what happened. They would have to if the case goes to public inquiry or hearing. Names and personal information should be anonymized. It was anyway in the SCR I read and social workers were referred to as social worker 1 or social worker 2. It is also the case that quite a lot of time elapses between the event and the publication as the SCR is written immediately (usually) and the case and the trial and exposure comes much later.

OFSTED did an audit of Serious Case Reviews and found that nearly two thirds, I believe, were inadequate. So – additionally – this would not have come to light without OFSTED’s exposure. If they were published – these inadequate SCRs would have been exposed much earlier. So – whilst the Serious Case Review I am most concerned about is obviously the Haringey one – it is clear there is a wider issue too.

So – I believe it is totally in the public interest for the Serious Case Review to be published. Secrecy, lack of transparency and openess and closing ranks are at the heart of the problem in Haringey.

I hope you find in favour of publication.

Kind regards
Lynne Feathestone

This week's other bits…………

Posted on by

Liberal Democrat Opposition Day Debates:
The Liberal Democrat opposition day debates were both ones that Labour should have supported. Labour failed to do so on both votes.

The first was on Equitable Life – and I am sure that every MP in the House has had heartbreaking letters from people who have lost their life savings through Equitable Life and are fed up waiting for the always promised, never delivered compensation.

The second motion was asking Parliament to sign up to the 10:10 campaign. Lots of individual MPs (including me) and councils have already signed up to reduce their carbon emissions by 10% by the end of the year 2010. The motion was asking the House itself to sign up, all Government departments and Public Sector Bodies. Given the Labour Government (and the Minister) were so fulsome in their praise for the 10:10 campaign – I am still at a loss as to why they failed to support the motion. They refused to sign us up to the 10:10 campaign. Shame on them. Blimey – even the Tories supported this one.

Women’s Questions
I asked the Minister what the Government was doing about removing the barriers to employing women that had been highlighted in the Equality and Human Rights Commission statement that women’s maternity rights etc were putting employers off. The Minister said she didn’t accept that was the case!

Book on Baby Peter
Met with an author/film maker who is doing the background research on a potential book about Baby Peter. Having received literally thousands of emails during the height of the Baby Peter coverage from people all over the country – including many professionals from relevant fields – who all had such knowledge and contribution, I am very pleased that someone serious is going to do a serious book on this. Whilst Panorama and other documentaries have all tried very hard – it really is not possible to address the complexities of this subject in entertainment format – so am very happy to help.

Meeting with Peter Lewis, Director Children’s Services, Haringey
Following neatly on, had organised a meeting with Peter Lewis to touch base on progress in terms of child protection in Haringey. When I first met Peter after he was appointed following the furore over child protection in Haringey – he told me that it would take him three years to turn Haringey’s Children’s Services around. The first inspection of how he and the department were doing decided things were improving but not fast enough. I hadn’t seen him for about six months – and I thought that some of the measures that Peter has brought in subsequent to that inspection to provide rigour in supervising (human rigour not tick box rigour) sounded like they would be effective. I also thought that his action to address the issue of recruiting social workers to Haringey (much needed – as unfilled posts and many agency workers currently) by bringing in social workers from the States and recruiting from big equivalent cities like New York showed initiative.

On education I brought Peter up to date with the Liberal Democrat campaign for Fair Funding (as our children get £1000 less per head than kids in Hackney or Islington) because we pay inner London staff salaries (high) and only receive outer London per pupil funding (low). Given that Haringey schools showed up recently as having a very high level of deficits in their budgets (one of the worst in the country) not surprisingly given that £1000 differential – the pressure has to be kept up to make the Government give us our fair share.

Meeting with new CEO at Whittington Hospital
First meeting with the new CEO of Whittington, Rob Larkman. This was a basically get to know you type meeting, setting out from my point of view the various key interests I have on behalf of local people. It was also about the funding problems coming down the track at our health services, the impact of the new Community Health Centre at the Hornsey Hospital site and in terms of the Whittington itself – my priority – which is making sure that patients are treated well – not just clinically – but as people.

The aspect which people raise with me about their hospital stays – when there are complaints – is always about how they were treated in human terms by the staff. Obviously – the vast majority of the staff are absolutely fabulous – and there are more people praising the Whittington and their treatment than are critical. But – those who do get badly handled – need their local hospital to take such issues really seriously. I have found that the Whittington has been very responsive in the past to any individual complaints I have taken to them – and now I want the new CEO to take over the last CEO’s promise to me – that patient treatment would be a priority.

I look forward to a good and constructive working relationship.

Nick Griffin's grin

Posted on by

Someone had obviously coached Nick Griffin for his Question Time debut, and the key advice given, was obviously to smile – whatever. Media trainers will always give such advice but they may have to rethink it. Mr Griffin’s attempt to present himself and the BNP as reasonable by hideously grinning throughout Question Time served only to make the British public see him even more clearly as a racist, homophobic, bigot.

And that’s good – the BNP is the appropriate party for a racist or a homophobe to vote for. On the doorstep, when I come across the thankfully rare occurrence of an obvious racist – I always say that I don’t want their vote.

But the BNP seats at the European table didn’t all come from racists. And the Government and local councils have not addressed some of the issues that drive those who feel disenfranchised into the arms of the BNP because they feel they are getting ignored or believe they delivered a raw deal.

The BNP and their ilk will always feed off of those who are disgruntled, disenfranchised and ignored. A vacuum in terms of political attention provides the perfect feeding ground for those who feed off of that discontent. Additionally, where there is a scarcity of resources – the extra pressures brought by high levels of immigration and asylum seeking means extra pressure on public services – school places, health services and housing key amongst them in those areas. 

The Government does not give local councils the full costs of bearing the weight of new immigrants and asylum seekers – so it does add pressures. If you take social housing in Haringey – for which the demand outstrips provision by such huge proportions that my surgeries are always populated by those who are desperately in need of housing. And yes – there is very occasionally ‘racism’ towards those who are perceived as arriving in this country with lots of children and immediately getting a house against those who are on the housing list for years and get nowhere. The stories are legion. The Equality and Human Rights Commission did an investigative piece of work to establish whether this tale of the ‘newly arrived’ jumping the housing queue was true – and found it was not. What is needed is more housing, and to publish transparently who gets what accommodation so that the suspicion can be allayed.

Back to Question Time. Yes – the BBC was absolutely right to invite Nick Griffin on to the program. It had no choice with the two MEPs having been elected. However, I don’t expect that those two seats at the European Parliament warrant more than a visit to Question Time once every few years if that – proportionally. If the rating s for last night persuade QT to offer that platform any more often than is proportionally deserved then they will lose the moral high ground which they claimed for giving the BNP that exposure this time round.

And media trainers will have to go back to the drawing board – as ‘smile and the world smiles with you’  just didn’t do it for the BNP.

Red faces on domestic flights issue

Posted on by

Stunned Labour councillors seemed unaware on Monday night of the information revealed by the Liberal Democrats about Haringey Council’s use of domestic flights. Gasps from the public gallery greeted Liberal Democrat Cllr Ed Butcher’s revelations that, despite a promise to not use domestic flights for council business, 17,038 miles were travelled on flights within the UK in the past two years.

At last night’s Full Council meeting councillors debated a motion to agree to support the Friends of the Earth campaign to reduce carbon emissions by 40% by 2020. Liberal Democrats highlighted Labour’s failure on the environment and tackling climate change – the broken promise on domestic flights was given as an example of this failure.

Liberal Democrats have now demanded details of when the flights were taken, who travelled, the destination and the cost to the taxpayer.

Cllr Ed Butcher (Stroud Green) comments:

“It was red faces all round in the Labour Group. Embarrassed Labour councillors seemed unaware that their own policy had been broken and this is an example of their lack of grip on this council’s administration.

”The serious issue is that, once again, Labour has said that they will stop the use of domestic flights for council business yet they have broken their promise.”

Lynne Featherstone MP adds:

“Local residents will not be able to believe a word Haringey Labour says about the environment. Their green credentials are now dead in the water.”