Can Trouble Shooter save the wardens? And stop Future Shape? And get money back from Iceland?

Mark Shooter has set out his stall before the Tory group meeting on 7 September that will decide whether he takes over as group leader from Lynne Hillan. In an interview with the Times series, Shooter appears to promise the earth - to the likes of me. Alas, Mark, I don't get a vote.

He seems to say a lot of the right things - if you don't like the Tory council and everything they stand for.

Read the interview here.

In it Shooter says the council:
- screwed up over the Icelandic bank deposits
- should review its plan to scrap sheltered housing wardens
- might be wasting money on the Future Shape scheme where it could make savings through other "efficiencies"
- has a bullying culture.

Has he done himself any favours with this interview? I doubt it. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I would think that he is doing work for David Cameron, reassuring Tory voters that the Barnet party has a nice wing as well as the nasty wing represented by Lynne Hillan and Brian Coleman, and that it is still safe to vote Tory! But I'm not a conspiracy theorist...

Another Barnet council AGM, another protest

The timing was a coincidence, but this evening I helped to organise a Save Middlesex Philosophy protest outside the Middlesex University Hendon campus on the same night as Barnet council AGM at Hendon Town Hall. We took our banners along there as well.

Middlesex University management, who have taken the short-sighted decision to close the university's very successful philosophy department, are part of the Local Strategic Partnership with Barnet council. There are some tensions with Middlesex University expanding its operations at Hendon; these can only increase if the university follows through on its plans to close the Trent Park campus (chasing those property speculation bucks) and move all courses to Hendon.

Does Barnet want to host a university that is solely focused on business and management students, packed in and taught as cheaply as possible, or can we see some value in having a balanced university that is as famed for its arts subjects as business, economics, etc? We are lucky to have a university in Barnet. Let's have one we can all be proud of. The Save Middlesex Philosophy campaign website is here - find out more and lend your support.

Last year, at this time, we were organising a Save Sheltered Housing Wardens demonstration outside Hendon Town Hall. I think, on balance, that protest caused the police more headaches than this evening's! Barnet sheltered housing features in tonight's (rescheduled) Panorama programme. (I'll have to watch it tomorrow on the internet as I'm finishing some work now.)

Pics from tonight's protest above. The man in the second picture is Middlesex University Vice-Chancellor Michael Driscoll. In the third picture, you can just see Barnet's chief exec Nick Walkley, coming out to check that we aren't about to storm the Town Hall and upset the mayor's canapes!

Challenging times for the left and the unions

I'm racing to finish a piece of work and haven't time to say much about anything right now - and the world keeps on turning?! I'm posting here the comment I made to an article in the Times series. In it Lynne Hillan says that she would review the relationship of her Tory group with the local Lib Dem Group, in the light of the coalition at the top of their two parties.

Barnet Tories and Lib Dems work more closely together. Hollow laughter all round, I would think. Joking apart, it does raise interesting questions.

On a question like sheltered housing warden cuts, Labour nationally didn't have a line but said it was up to local councils to do what they liked on this, and they made it possible for the cuts to be made.

Locally, some Lib Dem and Tory councils have gone for axing the wardens - and some haven't. It seems to be up to local party groups what stance they take. So in Barnet Lib Dem group was against warden cuts.

I don't know about the inner workings of the Lib Dems - how much autonomy do local groups have? Will they be forced to work closer with Tory groups on councils? (Shudder!)

I agree that Lib Dems are to the left of Labour on some (too many!) policies, and they have forced some good concessions from the Tories in this coalition deal. But my basic take on this is that all 3 parties (their leaderships, at least) were promising massive public sector cuts, whereas I don't believe that public services should be forced to pay for a crisis we did not create.

And Lib Dems have talked about banning public sector strikes, which is something the Tories would like to do as well. Let's see whether that is something this strengthened centre-right brings forward quickly? Challenging times to say the least, for the left and the trade unions. Gulp!

Vicki from Barnet trades council

Barnet almost on Panorama - transmission delayed by ongoing election coverage!

Tonight's "Panorama" programme was to have featured Barnet sheltered housing residents, as it is all about the looming council cuts, and people up and down the country already fighting back against various attacks on their services.

But transmission of the programme has been postponed due to ongoing coverage of the election fallout. Actually, it would have been most useful if this programme had gone out before the election, but that would have been too political for the statutorily neutral (yawn) Beeb.

Anyway, you can still see a lovely pic of Barnet campaigners on the programme website here.

Tories 39, Labour 21, Lib Dems 3 - let the nastiness commence!

The Times series reports rather a bollocks (it's a day for intemperate language in Barnet blogland) overall picture in the Barnet council elections:

Conservatives 39
Labour 21
Lib Dems 3

Lib Dem leader Jack Cohen comments on his party's poor showing:

It's disappointing. I think we were always up against it because the General Election was on the same day.

The local elections are about candidates who work and have a strong personal vote, but in General Elections many people don't take that into account.

Barnet blogger Roger Tichborne is one that has lost out. He would have made a great councillor. Don't bow out now, mate! With this crew in charge, we're going to need your wit and wisdom more than ever.

Barnet Tories will be feeling massively vindicated and will be rolling up their sleeves ready to inflict their wretched plans on Barnet: cuts to sheltered housing wardens (and it won't end there), easyCouncil... Just as soon as they have got over their champagne hangovers, that is. (I know, I'm just rubbing salt into the wound now.)

The more I see of them, the more I understand that Tories are hardnosed characters. Let Nick Clegg bear that in mind if he wants to go into coalition with them.

David Young says vote Labour or RAB in Barnet to save sheltered housing wardens

David Young has today issued a new press release on behalf of UK Pensioners Strategy Committee, the campaign he heads that is defending the sheltered housing wardens, in Barnet and nationally. I'll post the whole text below. David comes out for Labour on Barnet council. But he also says, if you can't bring yourself to vote Labour, vote for the Residents' Association of Barnet (RAB) candidates. (I've had a little debate with a RAB candidate on an earlier post about this.)

(I don't think David has anything particular against the Lib Dems...! Though I could be wrong!)

Roger Tichborne has commented that all the groups opposing the sheltered housing cuts perhaps haven't acted strategically enough during the election on this issue. He has a point.

We can be clear now, though: if you vote in a Tory council tomorrow, they will come back again to axe the sheltered housing wardens. They might not be able to push it through... but they will try to. If you want to save wardens in sheltering housing (and that's what the residents want), don't vote Tory tomorrow! David Young's press release:

UK pensioners back the Residents Association of Barnet to save wardens and public services

Don’t waste your vote - give it to RAB.

We warned the Barnet Council cabinet, they ignored us. They should have listened when we told them.

No Wardens, No Vote!

David Young, Chair of the UK Pensioners Strategy Committee, said:

“I’m advising all to vote Labour in the Barnet local elections to stop the Conservatives from running the council. If you can’t bring yourself to vote Labour then vote R.A.B., the Residents' Association of Barnet. At least this way we will have some candidates in the council who will genuinely endeavour to save Resident Sheltered Housing Wardens, and our public services.

"RAB are fielding independent candidates at the local election and we are supporting them.”

Sheltered housing campaigner says don't vote Tory in Barnet

David Young, the Barnet-based organiser of many of the protests against sheltered housing warden cuts, campaigned under the slogan "No wardens, no votes".

He and I and a lot of elderly sheltered housing residents and their supporters have delivered letters to the three main party leaders twice. The response has been feeble, with no one bothering to give a simple answer to a straight question: "Will you commit to take action to stop Councils removing Resident Sheltered Housing Wardens and where the Wardens service has been cut ensure it is reinstated?"

Councils around the country began to raid sheltered housing budgets once the government removed the ring fence from the Supporting People budget. The culprits include Lib Dem and Tory councils. I have not heard yet of a Labour council doing this, but I wouldn't rule it out! In any case, it was the Labour government that has made these cuts possible.

The Labour government's response to the question has come via the Department for Communities and Local Government:

The removal of the ring fence from the Supporting People grant, on 1 April 2009 supports the Government’s clear commitment to provide authorities with greater flexibility over their funding. However, we would expect local authorities to consult on and communicate any changes they were considering making to the support services in their area.

Since no party leader has committed to stopping or reversing the warden cuts, David Young has concluded:

We went to Clegg, Brown and Cameron on our walking sticks, Zimmer frames and wheelchairs, and the doors were slammed in our face. We urge all the righteous to support us by voting against the party in their area whose council has hurt us. We warned you, and we keep our promises. No wardens, no vote!

I happen to know that David Young is not a Labour supporter. (I don't know about the Lib Dems!) But he has concluded that people should not vote for the Conservatives in Barnet.

Let's be clear, only the Labour and Lib Dem groups on Barnet council are committed to defending the resident sheltered housing wardens. Barnet Tories are committed to axing them. If this issue is important to you, weigh it in the balance when you are deciding how to vote on Thursday.

The Barnet Press carries the story in more detail.

Barnet politicians grilled over sheltered housing wardens

Not able to join us on the sheltered housing demo yesterday were people involved in Barnet's 55+ forum. They were busy with an important event of their own, a hustings for local politicians.

More than 50 people were in the audience to grill Hendon Labour MP Andrew Dismore, Liberal Democrat council group leader Jack Cohen, Tory councillor Sachin Rajput, who is Barnet council's cabinet member for adult services, and Green Party parliamentary candidate for Hendon Andrew Newby.

The proposed sheltered housing warden cuts were high on people's agenda. Sachin Rajput continued to defend the cuts.

There's a full report on the Times series site.

A week of action for Barnet trades council

An astonishing range of activities this week (commencing Saturday). Barnet trades council's diary is pasted below to give a sense of what we have done already and will be doing for the rest of this week. Please join us if you can!

20-22 March. BA cabin crew strikes. Picket line visits.

Saturday 20 March. Demonstration against the far-right English Defence League in Bolton.

Saturday 20 March. Demonstration against college cuts organised by the lecturers' union UCU. (Picture below courtesy of Barnet Unison.)

Monday 22 March. Demonstration to support sheltered housing wardens, central London, assemble: noon, Parliament Square; at 1pm we will deliver letters to the main party leaders. Barnet residents of sheltered housing schemes are central to organising this event.

Tuesday 23 March. Staff and public meeting against planned cuts at Barnet College. 5.30pm, Building 3, North London Business Park. More information: 020 8200 8300. This meeting has been cancelled, alas.

Wednesday 24 March. Budget day strike by civil servants in the PCS union, as part of their campaign to defend their redundancy scheme. Information about picket lines and strike support will be posted on the Barnet TUC website.

Thursday 25 March. Barnet TUC AGM, 7-9pm, Council Chamber, Hendon Town Hall, the Burroughs, London NW4 4BG. All welcome, including trade unionists and local campigning groups.

27-30 March. BA cabin crew strikes. Picket line visits.

Barnet sheltered housing reprieve: how the news is received - the legal cost - implications for Future Shape

In early January Kingsley Court residents celebrated their
High Court victory with lawyer Yvonne Hossacks

David Young and his fellow Kingsley Court residents are celebrating, now it has been confirmed that Barnet will not appeal the High Court judgement against its decision to cut sheltered housing wardens, although lawyer Yvonne Hossacks is more cautious. Read Times series reports here and here.

The Times also has an article about the legal cost of Barnet council's defence at judicial review of their decision - £23,000. The council is setting aside £5 million to fight legal battles next year. (Check figure - it's enormous!)

The implications for the council's Future Shape programme are possibly huge. The council will have to carry out far more rigorous Equalities Impact Assessments in the light of the legal ruling. This, in turn, could make the savings they hope to achieve from their various Future Shape plans so small that they decide it is not worth the political flak to go ahead with some of them. Well, I can dream.

Barnet unlikely to appeal sheltered housing judgement - a stay of execution?

Reading a paper for the Cabinet of 3 February 2010, it looks like Barnet council will not appeal the legal judgement against their decision to axe the sheltered housing wardens. The reasons given are sketchy, but probably include political calculations - they would want to avoid having a wardens protest in the borough around the time of the council elections.

Rather than appealing, it seems likely that they will improve their consultation procedure, to take fuller account of the impact of their proposals on disabled people, and have another go at a later date. How much later? Remember, also, that all they have to do is prove that they consulted: they are quite free to ignore (as they did the first time) the outcome of any consultation.

So we can't quite call this a victory, and, moreover, it doesn't stop other councils going ahead and cutting their wardens (this campaign hasn't just been about Barnet). Nevertheless, a welcome stay of execution.

I'm pasting below quite a lot of Cabinet report. In red are the salient points (as far as my layperson's eye can tell):

USE OF RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS...

The 2010/11 budget as set out in the budget headlines assumes that sheltered housing warden provision remodelling would be completed from the second quarter of 2010/11 realising a £300,000 efficiency saving. As the remodelling cannot now proceed, the £300,000 efficiency cannot be achieved. It is proposed that this is met for 2010/11 from central contingencies.

...As a result of the judgment, the ongoing deficit in the Council’s proposed budget for 2011/12 onwards, due to the absence of a full year efficiency saving of £400,000 arising from changes to warden provision in sheltered housing will need to be considered as part of the 2011/12 budget process [does this mean they are giving up on the plan altogether?]

LEGAL ISSUES

In brief the judgment of the High Court was that, in taking the decision on 8 June 2009, Barnet did not demonstrate that it had ‘due regard’ to its duties under s49A (1) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and the conclusion drawn in its equalities impact assessment, whilst properly considering an ‘adverse impact’, failed to consider a ‘different impact’ and further was considered to be “Wednesbury” unreasonable. [a new word to look up]

...Portsmouth City Council (PCC) were subject to a similar judicial review challenge on the changes to their sheltered housing provision; their judicial review was joined with the Council’s. Their decision was also quashed. PCC obtained permission to appeal on 18 January 2010. In order to protect its position, Officers lodged an application on behalf of the Council for permission to appeal on 19 January 2010, which was the last day for making an application, so that more detailed consideration could be given to the merits of an appeal.

...Officers have considered whether there are grounds for appeal and are of the view that it would not be appropriate to go to appeal based on the facts of this case which focus on whether in taking the decision on the 8 June 2009, Cabinet could demonstrate that they had had sufficient due regard to the duties under the terms of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

...With the judgment quashing the decision of Cabinet made on 8 June 2009, implementation of the changes to the sheltered housing warden arrangements cannot proceed unless Cabinet takes a new decision to remodel warden provision to sheltered housing. Any future decision must clearly demonstrate (in a manner that would satisfy the Court) that ‘due regard’ has been had to the entirety of Section 49A(1) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995...

...The judgment raises a number of issues for attention by Cabinet as it seeks to implement fundamental service redesign through the Future Shape programme and to reshape its relationship with citizens. A review of the judgment has been conducted by Legal Services and the Council’s Strategic Equalities Adviser...

The judgment expressly states that “Councillors should be aware of the special duties the Council owes to the disabled before they take a decision”. ...The judgment states that the requirement of decision-makers goes beyond awareness and requires a ‘rigorous and open minded approach’ and there needs to be evidence of this approach....

...The Court ...considered that the Council had involved disabled people in the consultation process in this matter and had amended the proposal to reflect the feedback received. However the analysis of the responses to the consultation did not differentiate between those of disabled tenants who would be affected by the proposals and other respondents.

2010 council budget - cuts, including to sheltered housing

The Times series reports on last night's Barnet council cabinet meeting which agreed its budget headlines for 2010-11.

£15m cuts to balance Barnet's budget while council tax remains static

By Sarah Cosgrove

ADULT and children's services and the environment are the main losers in this year's proposed budget as councillors struggle to keep council tax at current levels and cope with rising costs.

Read more.

I wish I had time to comment on the details; I do have time to mention that the council has had to put back into its spending some of the savings it had hoped to make on abolishing the sheltered housing wardens. This is because, owing to the legal challenge, they haven't been able to terminate the contracts they have with housing providers for warden services as quickly as they expected.

Please note, however, that they had expected to save £400,000 over the year, and have now budgeted that they will save £300,000. That means they expect to press ahead with their plans soon. Will they appeal the decision against them, as Portsmouth council has? Will they win an appeal? Would the political price be worth paying, in the run-up to the council elections? These are all calculations for them to make. For our part, we know what we will be doing - carrying on our campaign to save the wardens!

Postscript. I don't dislike the Times series half as much as the Barnet Eye does. I think the journos do a pretty good job under, what I suspect, is some political pressure, but I do wish they would sub their online articles better. Some of the budget article simply didn't make sense.

Islam4UK, the Barnet sheltered housing march, and the defence of democracy

I'm not sure that banning Islam4UK is a good idea. I suspect that banning them will gain them a few more recruits, rather than lose them any. In general, I am against the state exercising its power to decide how or whether people can organise politically.

Where there is dangerous criminality, of course, it's reasonable to step in to prevent that.

I'm glad Islam4UK called off their planned march through Wootton Bassett. It was a stunt designed mainly to cause offence to military families.

I don't support the UK's intervention in Afghanistan, and Islam4UK aren't completely insane in what they say about western military intervention in the Middle East (although they are insane in what they say about almost everything else), but the march deserved to be stopped.

But by who? By the state? Curiously, the government was ambivalent about whether it would intervene to stop Islam4UK's march, but has now banned the organisation. I'm not in favour of the state banning demonstrations, however detestable the cause.

In the great scheme of things it is hard to imagine that the banning of Islam4UK is the thin edge of a wedge which would see the state banning more and more of its political opponents, of whatever political stripe. But I still worry.

Yesterday, the government lost in the European Court of Human Rights over its section 44 stop and searches under the Terrorism Act 2000. These have been used extensively against journalists and protestors with nothing like terrorism on their mind. They allow police to stop and search people 'on a hunch'; suspects' details, even when they are found to have done nothing wrong, are generally retained. On Monday night, I went to my union meeting - the London Freelance Branch of the National Union of Journalists. Attending was Pennie Quinton, one of the journalists who brought the case in the ECHR. In this article she explains the background.

Yes, the state is seeking to expand its powers. As a society are we vigilant enough about this? Do we ourselves too readily call for bans on things we don't like? It takes a lot of self-control to tolerate dissent and a lot of effort to listen to and argue against ideas we don't agree with. But that's what democracy requires. If you don't practise democracy - in all senses of the word 'practise' - I fear you lose it.

Let me give you an example closer to home. From the sublimely awful Islam4UK, and over-zealous anti-terrorism legislation, to the astonishing case of the Barnet sheltered housing march.

A friend of mine was recently summoned to a meeting between Barnet council, the local police, and 'leaders' of the Muslim community in Barnet. The aim of the meeting was for the council and police to dissuade anyone who might be thinking of joining the counter-demonstration to the planned far-right rally in Harrow.

That, in my view, is objectionable enough. Why should Muslims remain meekly at home while racists parade in front of their mosque?

But Mike Freer, who was still council leader, also let slip that he had been under pressure (he didn't say who from) during the summer to BAN the march to defend sheltered housing that went through his ward in Finchley. To his credit, he resisted that call (and I doubt he could ban it if he wanted to) but the very idea that anyone in Freer's political vicinity should ask him to do so is shocking.

I would think in this case that such a call would be more down to political laziness, than to authoritarianism, but it certainly shows disdain for the importance of democratic traditions such as the right to protest. Democracy - use it or lose it, even in Barnet.

Sheltered housing residents win in court

Read a report on the Times series website here.

The decisions by Barnet and Portsmouth councils to cut the wardens from sheltered housing schemes was taken without proper regard to the rights of the residents under the Disability Discrimination Act.

Judge Milwyn Jarman QC said:

“neither authority in my judgement had any or sufficient regard to such an impact upon those residents with disabilities as a separate group or to the need to recognise that the taking into account of those disabilities may involve treating disabled persons more favourably than others.”

According to the Times:

Solicitor for the claimants, Yvonne Hossack, said: “We're absolutely delighted for all the people of Barnet who have been affected by this.

“Luckily it will mean a happier Christmas for them.”

Congratulations to everyone who has taken part in the campaign to save the wardens. No doubt vigilance and more political campaigning will be needed as Barnet council shows no signs of being ready to be corrected, and will probably appeal the decision.

Guardian report of the decision here, linking it to the whole easyCouncil project.

Sheltered housing wardens: two demonstrations and two days in court

Tomorrow, Monday 30 November, Barnet residents of sheltered housing and their supporters will demonstrate at 11am outside Conservative party HQ at 30 Millbank and at 12.15pm outside 10 Downing Street. This is to show opposition to the axing of sheltered housing wardens ahead of the judicial review of Barnet council's decision to make such cuts.

The judicial review is this week on Wednesday 2 and Thursday 3 December at the High Court on the Strand. There will be rallies outside the courts at 10am each day of the hearing.

On Monday 7 December there is a national protest against sheltered housing cuts. Assemble 3pm in Trafalgar Square for a march to Downing Street to hand in a national petition.

The Barnet wardens fight is an example for all

Yvonne Hossacks, the lawyer acting for a number of sheltered housing residents in Barnet and other areas, has succeeded in her motion for a judicial review of Barnet council's decision to axe its sheltered housing wardens. This means at least a delay in the axing of the wardens, because the council cannot now terminate the contracts for the existing service when it wanted to.

It also means that sheltered housing, as it deserves to be, will still be a live issue in the run-up to the next local - and general - election.

Congratulations to David Young and all the other sheltered housing residents in Barnet who have refused to just give up the service they value and rely on. I have been involved, through Barnet Community Campaign, in organising some protests and also want to praise those who have been involved in those.

Sheltered housing is an important, but only one of the areas of public services that are coming under attack and which will come under attack in the coming months and years. We have got to mobilise many more people in the defence of their services. The tenacity and imagination of David and his comrades (if I can call them that) in the campaign to defend their warden service is a great example of where we all need to be heading.

Times report of the judicial review here.

The campaigning year in pictures - and it's not over yet!

I decided to submit a picture to the labour photo of the year contest (strictly amateur!) organised by LabourStart. I thought I must have something from the Vestas dispute (see last pic) - when I looked through I remembered what a busy year it's been! I'm posting a few snaps here from the period from last December - the first Future Shape lobby of the council. If you like any of them, please let me know which because I can only submit one pic to the contest and need help choosing. Thank you.

Day of righteousness part 1: Yvonne Hossacks

Yvonne Hossacks, campaigning solicitor on behalf of sheltered housing residents fighting the threat to their wardens, has won her solicitors disciplinary tribunal.

No more detail on the case but the following website will show you how much Yvonne is appreciated by her clients: www.shelteredhousinguk.com.

Yah boo sucks to those local authorities who have tried to shut her up by taking out complaints against her and trying to end her career.