Tag Archives: haringey council

Secret ministerial documents reveal problems over Haringey housing

Posted on by

From the news release over on my website:

An urgent review of how £200m will be spent by Homes for Haringey has been demanded by local Liberal Democrats following the revelation that serious government ‘concerns’ over the high costs of Haringey Council’s ALMO bid delayed the cash award. The serious indictment of Haringey’s ability to spend money efficiently was contained in a secret ministerial briefing marked ‘not for the public domain’ obtained by local Lib Dem MP, Lynne Featherstone through a Freedom of Information request.

You can read the rest of the story here and here’s the full information revealled by the Freedom of Information request – one thing you’ll notice is how the background note gives a much better and clearer answer to the question than the actual answer presented:

HOUSE OF COMMONS
WRITTEN PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION
For answer on: Monday 7 January 2008
Date answered: [parliamentary to enter]
DCLG Ref: 1093 07/08 Party: LD
Lynne Featherstone (Hornsey & Wood Green)

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, when Haringey Council and Homes for Haringey will be given their full funding under the Decent Homes Programme for improvement to housing stock; and what the reasons are for the time taken to provide the funding. [175562]

Mr Iain Wright

Draft answer:
The ALMO, Homes for Haringey has yet to be accepted onto the ALMO funding programme. The funding requirement outlined within their bid needs to be understood and ensure it is affordable, before it can be agreed or accepted onto the programme. Officials are in discussions with Homes for Haringy and Haringey Council and aim to reach an agreement early next year.

Officials are in discussions with Homes for Haringey and Haringey Council and aim to reach an agreement early next year [end of January]. Officials are working with the remaining round six bids, to better understand the bids received and ensure the programme remains affordable.

Drafting Official:
Sheldon Ferguson
Clearing Official:
Anne Kirkham

Background note Information for the Minister (Not for the public domain)

Haringey’s ALMO bid has not yet been accepted onto the programme. We are concerned that costs within the bid are high and as a consequence, unaffordable. Officials have opened discussions with Haringey and are conscious they have a two star rating from the Audit Commission, and are consequently seeking a quick resolution. It is anticipated that Ministers will be approached by Haringey’s Council Leader for a meeting to agree a final sum. In the meantime a review of the costs for Haringey’s ALMO programme is underway.

This applies to the other Round Six bids that are to be accepted onto the programme. We aim to reach an agreement for the remaining bids by the end of March 2008. We do not expect a request for a meeting, because the outstanding bids have yet to achieve a two star rating.

More trouble with personal data at Haringey Council

Posted on by

Well – went to the ex-Haringey Council housing office in Crouch End – again – to do some media stuff over the discovery of piles of files containing personal data on 20,000 people. The files had been abandoned by Haringey Council when they stopped using the building – just left behind, unsecured.

Now, after the news broke – the Council said they had then secured the files. But what happened when I turned up to meet the media?

One of the squatters came out and invited us in to see where the stash of private information in the files had been. Just round from the door in a sort of cupboard was where four-foot stacks of peoples’ private information had been just abandoned.

I then went outside to wait – and a few minutes latter the squatter Steve and the media came out carrying a box of 14 files that had just been left on the floor. So much for Haringey Council having secured the files after the news broke!

Anyway – the Liberal Democrat council group tabled the motion about the dumped data – and Labour (obviously very hang dog) supported us. The council Chief Executive promised that all the individuals would be contacted – and we have asked for an independent investigation.

I want to be able to reassure local residents that their private and sensitive information that is given to Haringey Council will be properly looked after in future – whether archived or current.

The casual approach to people’s data is a real concern as we move further and further into an age where our details are kept technologically. And as for finding another 14 files even after Haringey said they’d secured the abandoned files…!

What would you do with files of personal information, including bank details, on 20,000 people?

Posted on by

If you’re Haringey Council – the answer is, “leave the dumped in a squatted building”.

Yes – really! That’s what The Sun has discovered. The building in question is in Crouch End, and used to be used by a council Housing Benefit office. But when they stopped using the building, they failed to secure or clear out the files. Instead, we have a building open to anyone to walk in – and stuffed full of personal files, containing details of 20,000 people, including in many cases all the details needed for identity theft.

I am shocked and extremely concerned for the people affected. They urgently need to know the risk they have been exposed to by Haringey Council’s incompetence. They must be contacted immediately by Haringey Council so they can check whether or not they have been a victim of identify theft or fraud. Then, the council leaders need to sit down and seriously review their archiving system. With benefit claims, child protection documents and Council Tax records, Haringey Council holds some extremely sensitive information on virtually every person in the borough – and it must be properly looked after.

Neil Williams, leader of the Liberal Democrat group on Haringey Council, is tabling an emergency council motion today calling for a thorough investigation and review.

Leisure passes for the over-65s: pressure starts to pay off

Posted on by

Good news: as one of our local newspapers reports, some in Haringey Labour are starting to get cold feet over their plans to remove free leisure passes for the over 65s.

The campaign pressure is clearly starting to pay off … and you can help keep up the pressure and make their feet colder (as it were!) by signing the petition at ourcampaign.org.uk/leisure

Haringey Labour remove free leisure passes for the over 65s

Posted on by

Campaigning to keep Haringey's free leisure passes for pensioners with Cllr David WinskillWent to Park Road Pools to launch a petition to reverse Haringey Labour’s ridiculous decision to remove the free passes for leisure for the over 65s.

You can sign the petition online at ourcampaign.org.uk/leisure

I did a photo op with Crouch End councillor David Winskill, and two older ladies who are incandescent (as are the three hundred who attended a meeting at Tottenham Leisure Centre last week) about Haringey Labour’s budget cut of £52,000 removing the free passes that our elderly residents currently have.

This is nuts. It’s a small sum compared to the huge Labour waste, and yet the activity, social engagement and exercise that these older residents get from using their passes to go to classes or swim or whatever is a wonderfully productive investment – not to mention the enjoyment it brings – as it helps people keep fit and happy and socialised.

My Liberal Democrat colleagues identified £3million waste in the Haringey Council budget last week. Cut that waste – not the leisure passes!

In other local news – I met the minister to put the case for fair funding of Haringey’s schools, as reported over on my website.

Labour lets us down over plastic bags

Posted on by

I’ve blogged before about some of the great things local communities, such as residents and businesses in Crouch End, are doing to help tackle over-use of plastic bags – with all the litter and environmental problems that flow from them.

So it’s really disappointing that this week Labour councillors in Haringey blocked moves to support more of these schemes in our borough. It’s like walking back into the worst excesses of the 1970s when a Labour councillor objects to schemes to reduce usage of plastic bags because … “unions weren’t consulted”! It’s not as if we’re talking about cuts some jobs in the council or anything – just about supporting residents and businesses with a sensible scheme to aid our environment. And how out of touch of Labour councillors to say such schemes won’t work – when right here in Crouch End we have a successful scheme that is working.

But you know what annoys me most about this? It’s a classic case of there being a problem, people getting together locally to come up with imaginative solutions and then the state (Haringey Council in this case) failing to do its bit to help. It’s that sort of narrow-minded conservatism which, in the end, damages the case for everyone who believes there’s a need for councils and government to help provide decent services for everyone.

UPDATE: The Ham & High has covered the story, with more from my colleague Cllr Bob Hare (Highgate).

Victory in parking signs battle

Posted on by

At last! Last year my colleague Martin Newton (Fortis Green ward) took up with the Department of Transport the case of some badly designed and confusing parking signs in Haringey. The Department confirmed our view – and said they were unsatisfactory. Haringey Council has now agreed to take proper action on the signs.

I hope this will finally put an end to the parking roulette residents often have to play on streets of Haringey. Parking restrictions should be about sensibly managing limited spaces rather than frankly confusing signs that can lead to people being unfairly caught out. We’ll see!

Haringey Council tries to sideline residents over planning applications

Posted on by

Bad new on planning applications locally – Haringey Council are not letting residents come to site visits by the Planning Committee. This is ludicrous. What better way of understanding objections than to hear from people on site what their case is and why they are objecting? Now – of course residents mustn’t intimidate or bully, nor must the Planning Committee members be partisan in their comments – but for heavens sake let the people come!

As my colleague, Bob Hare (Highgate ward councillor) says, the gold standard for site visits is those conducted by Planning Inspectors at appeals. VERY tightly chaired with a strict protocol. The inspector makes sure everyone is clear on what is proposed, where buildings will come out to, how high etc. Both sides (developer and residents) have a chance to say something. Councillors can ask questions. There is no arguing between developer and residents.That’s the way to promote better planning decisions – not keeping the people most affected away.

Litvinenko house: "imminent risk of serious harm"

Posted on by

So – finally today I got to speak to the Litvinenko lawyer following our conversation last week.

From conversations today I know that close neighbours remain worried – not surprisingly given that Haringey Council, whilst taking down the plastic sheeting, has now put up an ‘Emergency Prohibition Order’ (under the Housing Act of 2004, Section 43).

I quote from the Order: ‘The Council is further satisfied that the hazard presents an imminent risk of serious harm to the health or safety of any of the occupiers of those or other premises’.

Moreover, on the second page of the Order it affirms that the hazard is ‘radiation’; that there is contamination from Polonium 210 and that in order for the Council to revoke this order requires ‘remediation works to reduce the radiation levels of all the surfaces in all parts of the premises to not more than 10 Bequerels per square centimetre’.

Now, Haringey Council have been assuring people on their website that “Haringey Council enforcement officers want to reassure the public that living close to the property in Osier Crescent is not a health hazard”, but this is contradicted by the Emergency Prohibition Order – which says there is “an imminent risk of serious harm to the health or safety of any of the occupiers of those or other premises.”

So – I have emailed the Leader of Haringey, George Meehan to make it quite clear that in my view it is the Council’s responsibility to make sure the house is safe – and get it cleaned up.

And it is downright irresponsible to tell residents it is safe at the same time as putting up the notice saying it isn’t. Make up your mind Haringey!

Anyway – back to the Litvinenko lawyer’s update. And as I understand the situation as of this posting – the directors of the company in control of the Litvinenko house have written to Haringey to ask on what basis an Emergency Prohibition Order was applied. At the same time they have formally appealed against the imposition of the order – but they may not appeal depending on them satisfying themselves that there is a proper basis for that Order. And – I was told – Haringey have not responded.

This set of lawyers are very angry that Haringey implies that they are not cooperating as they say they have been in contact with Haringey prior to last week.

All rather messy and unsatisfactory! But it boils down to this: Haringey Council says on its website that everything is safe, but they Emergency Prohibition Order says not. The lawyers involved say Haringey hasn’t responded to everything and think the Council is wrongly implying that they are playing ball.

So my message to Haringey Council is simple – stop messing around, stop saying conflicting things and get it sorted.

Bafflement and anger over school places

Posted on by

Nearly all the morning was surgery (i.e. meeting succession of constituents who have individual cases they want to raise with me face-to-face). This is the time of year when a trail of virtually suicidal parents come to see me because their children have not got not only their first or second choice schools – but as of today – not even their sixth choice.

It is a woeful process and totally baffling at times. Whilst not every child can get in exactly where their parents want, there are some examples that are quite extraordinary when several children from different families all living close to each other get into a school – but another child also living right next to them all doesn’t (and none of them have siblings at the school, so it’s not the siblings rule at work). So how can parents believe it is fair? Perhaps it is time that Haringey was forced to publish who gets in from where and why!