I was tickled to see this week that the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Eric Pickles was taken to the High Court by his own departmental staff over attacks on their union PCS. And that he lost.
I have a friend or two in the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) and I know they have had a very hard time recently trying to represent the interests of their members at the same as they are no longer given time off work to do union duties, and the union has been banned even from meeting on the premises.
In the same way that Pickles offered his own departmental spending as a sacrificial lamb in the Spending Review, promising savage cuts to local government spending, for example, for which we are all paying now in reduced and privatised services, he has also dumped on his very own departmental staff.
The main dispute that the union went to the High Court over is the plan to stop "check-off" whereby union dues are collected at source from wages.
Pickles prides himself on representing the interests of local taxpayers. In Barnet he has had, albeit obliquely, to apologise for the sneering attitude towards democracy of the local Tories. I give credit where it's due, and I acknowledge Pickles' solicitude for the rights of the little man and woman against Town Hall bureaucrats, where the Town Hall does act like bureaucrats.
Pickles, apparently, was a socialist in his youth but he abandoned socialism when the Russian tanks went into Czechoslovakia in 1968 to crush the Prague Spring democratisation movement. When we organised our Barnet Spring march in the snow earlier this
year, that was one of the echoes that gave our protest more poignancy.
However, just like many a leftist who ended up backing and apologising for vicious dictatorships just because they weren't Western imperialists, the politics of the Cold War seem to have disorientated Pickles and he went over to the right and joined the forces of Conservatism.
I would argue that it is a mistake to conclude that your enemy's enemy is your friend but, as far as I can see, that is what Pickles has done. From siding with the working class, he went over to the enemy, and has been batting for the rich ever since.
Now Pickles needs to remember that the people working in his own department are little men and women as well, who deserve to be supported against their own species of bureaucrat - their bosses. Trade unions serve such a purpose and always have - and always will. You can't kill the spirit.
Arguably, the key force that began the process that led to the collapse of the Soviet empire was the inspiring Polish Solidarnosc (Solidarity) trade union.
Alas, there is every likelihood that Pickles will appeal against this week's court ruling.
I would urge everyone who has drawn some comfort from Pickles' well-aimed jibes against Barnet's Tory Council to help him see sense over this issue. Send a message to Pickles via Twitter - @EricPickles - and watch for developments on the PCS website. Tell Pickles - hands off PCS!
Showing posts with label Eric Pickles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eric Pickles. Show all posts
Friday, 6 September 2013
Sunday, 7 October 2012
Buyer beware OR The strange case of Grant Shapps
For a while, (some of) the Barnet Bloggers have sort of had the ear of Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Eric Pickles - albeit he inexplicably turned down a request to come to tea with (some of) us at Cafe Buzz in North Finchley.
(Last time a top Tory politician hit a Barnet high street he was mobbed by some very unsavoury types, so I can understand his reluctance.)
Eric Pickles could be relied on to grasp the significance of the uselessness of the Barnet Tory administration, and throw their deeds back in their faces, without ever actually - as far as I know - contacting any of the bloggers directly. It was all done at a discreet distance. After all, the bloggers are, as well as being completely correct about most things happening in Barnet politics, the political enemy (political with a small p).
We bloggers - some of us - were not above appealing also to one of Pickles' ministers at the DCLG, Grant Shapps, contacting him on Twitter and so on.
In David Cameron's recent reshuffle, Shapps became Conservative Party chair.
Grant Shapps is a relatively local boy. I know little about him, but I never imagined that he had the gravitas of Pickles. Whatever one thinks of Pickles, as far as I know, he grew up in a fairly modest family, and joined the Conservatives in disgust at Russian interference in the Prague Spring - or maybe that's just a colourful myth he tells about himself. Well, it has a ring of truth. Anyway, he did the wrong thing but for good reasons.
In a Telegraph interview in 2009 he says he read Marx and Trotsky in his teenage years. "I was a pretty serious young chap. For my 14th birthday I got Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution as a present — and I read the damn thing."
And why not, Eric? It's a bloody good read!
The unfolding revelations about Grant Shapps show that he certainly is capable of telling colourful myths. We must all know by now, what he would probably rather we didn't, that he has made his fortune selling crap books on the internet, posing as a marketing guru, and going under an assumed name, Michael Green.
However legal or otherwise Shapps' various businesses have been - some are now under investigation by various authorities - it has to be embarrassing to be exposed for having made your fortune by selling crap to gullible people. Legal? Maybe. But ethical? No. And honorable? Definitely not!
On the eve of the Conservative Party conference Shapps has given a generally rather sour-sounding interview to the Telegraph. It ends on what's supposed to be an upbeat note, but rings hollow:
(Last time a top Tory politician hit a Barnet high street he was mobbed by some very unsavoury types, so I can understand his reluctance.)
Eric Pickles could be relied on to grasp the significance of the uselessness of the Barnet Tory administration, and throw their deeds back in their faces, without ever actually - as far as I know - contacting any of the bloggers directly. It was all done at a discreet distance. After all, the bloggers are, as well as being completely correct about most things happening in Barnet politics, the political enemy (political with a small p).
We bloggers - some of us - were not above appealing also to one of Pickles' ministers at the DCLG, Grant Shapps, contacting him on Twitter and so on.
In David Cameron's recent reshuffle, Shapps became Conservative Party chair.
Grant Shapps is a relatively local boy. I know little about him, but I never imagined that he had the gravitas of Pickles. Whatever one thinks of Pickles, as far as I know, he grew up in a fairly modest family, and joined the Conservatives in disgust at Russian interference in the Prague Spring - or maybe that's just a colourful myth he tells about himself. Well, it has a ring of truth. Anyway, he did the wrong thing but for good reasons.
In a Telegraph interview in 2009 he says he read Marx and Trotsky in his teenage years. "I was a pretty serious young chap. For my 14th birthday I got Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution as a present — and I read the damn thing."
And why not, Eric? It's a bloody good read!
The unfolding revelations about Grant Shapps show that he certainly is capable of telling colourful myths. We must all know by now, what he would probably rather we didn't, that he has made his fortune selling crap books on the internet, posing as a marketing guru, and going under an assumed name, Michael Green.
However legal or otherwise Shapps' various businesses have been - some are now under investigation by various authorities - it has to be embarrassing to be exposed for having made your fortune by selling crap to gullible people. Legal? Maybe. But ethical? No. And honorable? Definitely not!
On the eve of the Conservative Party conference Shapps has given a generally rather sour-sounding interview to the Telegraph. It ends on what's supposed to be an upbeat note, but rings hollow:
"The day of the reshuffle I went to see the Prime Minister in Downing Street, and today I can reveal precisely what he said. 'Grant, you’ve got one task as chairman, get out there and kick-start our campaign, rally the troops, take the fight to Labour and help us win in 2015," he said."Got to be regretting that now.
Thursday, 19 July 2012
Barnet bloggers on... Off-payroll Public Sector Pay Arrangements
The subject of Town Hall Tax Dodging (a phrase coined by the Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government) is one of enormous interest to the Barnet bloggers, and we applaud the attention paid to this issue by the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (chaired by the Rt Hon Margaret Hodge MP) which took place on Monday 16 July 2012.
This investigation of the issue of tax avoidance by individuals in publicly funded posts came about following the disclosure by Westminster journalist David Hencke that Ed Lester, the head of the Student Loan Company, was being paid through a service company, and that there are similar arrangements on a very significant scale throughout the civil service and the wider public sector.
One witness before the committee was Carolyn Downs, the Chief Executive of the Local Government Association (LGA). She stated that the LGA had found only 13 examples of off-payroll public sector pay.
We know that this national figure of 13 is an understatement since the draft (i.e. unaudited) Annual Accounts of Barnet Council for 2011-2012 show that there are 14 such arrangements recorded as having been in place during the year for senior officers.
Far from being a practice that is diminishing it is noted that in the previous year's accounts there were only 8 such arrangements.
The evidence to the committee was that these arrangements were used in the short-term. We can show that this is not true and that, on the contrary, these arrangements are used routinely for long term appointments.
In Barnet, one ‘interim’ post paid through a private company has lasted for more than three years. An appointment lasting over 3 years cannot be described as short-term. In addition, a Freedom of Information request has revealed that there have been no efforts to replace this individual with a permanent staff member.
Evidence to the committee also suggested that there was virtually no difference between the tax paid under PAYE or via a service company. That is to ignore two factors. If a service company is used certain expenses, such as travelling, can be reclaimed whereas an employee does not get tax relief for home to work travel costs. In addition, service companies are able to pay out their profits as dividends and National Insurance Contributions are not paid on those. The overall contribution to the Exchequer will be less if a service company is employed.
We look forward to the day when Barnet Council ensures that all its officers (employees) are treated equally and that all those people who receive their pay from the public purse recognise what Mrs Hodge referred to as a ‘moral duty’ to make their fair contribution to the taxes which contribute to the good of society.
We call on Nick Walkley, the Chief Executive of Barnet Council, to negotiate the return to the payroll of the officers concerned as this will reduce the penalties that will have to be paid as a consequence of the inevitable HM Revenue & Customs PAYE compliance visit.
We also look forward to following the evolution of this story in front of the Public Accounts Committee once the summer recess is over.
Derek Dishman
John Dix
Vicki Morris
Theresa Musgrove
Roger Tichborne
19 July 2012
This investigation of the issue of tax avoidance by individuals in publicly funded posts came about following the disclosure by Westminster journalist David Hencke that Ed Lester, the head of the Student Loan Company, was being paid through a service company, and that there are similar arrangements on a very significant scale throughout the civil service and the wider public sector.
One witness before the committee was Carolyn Downs, the Chief Executive of the Local Government Association (LGA). She stated that the LGA had found only 13 examples of off-payroll public sector pay.
We know that this national figure of 13 is an understatement since the draft (i.e. unaudited) Annual Accounts of Barnet Council for 2011-2012 show that there are 14 such arrangements recorded as having been in place during the year for senior officers.
Far from being a practice that is diminishing it is noted that in the previous year's accounts there were only 8 such arrangements.
The evidence to the committee was that these arrangements were used in the short-term. We can show that this is not true and that, on the contrary, these arrangements are used routinely for long term appointments.
In Barnet, one ‘interim’ post paid through a private company has lasted for more than three years. An appointment lasting over 3 years cannot be described as short-term. In addition, a Freedom of Information request has revealed that there have been no efforts to replace this individual with a permanent staff member.
Evidence to the committee also suggested that there was virtually no difference between the tax paid under PAYE or via a service company. That is to ignore two factors. If a service company is used certain expenses, such as travelling, can be reclaimed whereas an employee does not get tax relief for home to work travel costs. In addition, service companies are able to pay out their profits as dividends and National Insurance Contributions are not paid on those. The overall contribution to the Exchequer will be less if a service company is employed.
We look forward to the day when Barnet Council ensures that all its officers (employees) are treated equally and that all those people who receive their pay from the public purse recognise what Mrs Hodge referred to as a ‘moral duty’ to make their fair contribution to the taxes which contribute to the good of society.
We call on Nick Walkley, the Chief Executive of Barnet Council, to negotiate the return to the payroll of the officers concerned as this will reduce the penalties that will have to be paid as a consequence of the inevitable HM Revenue & Customs PAYE compliance visit.
We also look forward to following the evolution of this story in front of the Public Accounts Committee once the summer recess is over.
Derek Dishman
John Dix
Vicki Morris
Theresa Musgrove
Roger Tichborne
19 July 2012
Thursday, 24 May 2012
Alive and well in England's most rock 'n' roll hotel
I just thought I would let concerned readers know that I am alive and well and recovering in Brighton's most rock 'n' roll hotel from a sustained bout of online editing (well, a girl has to earn a living).
I found a room through one of those late booking websites. It was a good price and I was offered a pop culture/music themed room: could be Rough Trade (the mind boggles), the Lee 'Scratch' Perry dub reggae room...
In the event they took one look at me and put me in the lady's boudoir. Instead of ducks flying up the wall there are plaster casts of women's arses. Clad in black knickers.
Outside my window a seagull is nesting, and it resents intrusions, or else I would share with you a snapshot of the Brighton roofscape basking in the unseasonally warm weather. Makes a welcome break from the unseasonally cold and wet weather, non?
I am mixing politics with pleasure - as you would expect - on the fringes of the national conference of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS - Mark Serwotka's crowd.)
While I am here, I am collecting dirt on Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Eric Pickles. Yes, I know he is in some respects the scourge of Barnet Tories, but my enemy's enemy is certainly not, in this case, my friend. More soon. Well, a Citizen Barnet enjoying a short break sort of soon.
I found a room through one of those late booking websites. It was a good price and I was offered a pop culture/music themed room: could be Rough Trade (the mind boggles), the Lee 'Scratch' Perry dub reggae room...
In the event they took one look at me and put me in the lady's boudoir. Instead of ducks flying up the wall there are plaster casts of women's arses. Clad in black knickers.
Outside my window a seagull is nesting, and it resents intrusions, or else I would share with you a snapshot of the Brighton roofscape basking in the unseasonally warm weather. Makes a welcome break from the unseasonally cold and wet weather, non?
I am mixing politics with pleasure - as you would expect - on the fringes of the national conference of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS - Mark Serwotka's crowd.)
While I am here, I am collecting dirt on Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Eric Pickles. Yes, I know he is in some respects the scourge of Barnet Tories, but my enemy's enemy is certainly not, in this case, my friend. More soon. Well, a Citizen Barnet enjoying a short break sort of soon.
Friday, 10 February 2012
The Friday joke's on Andrew Travers (and other senior execs at Barnet council)
A great initiative from the trade union Unison today. Their national office is calling on Eric Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, to look into Barnet council's practice of employing consultants in top posts - eg, deputy chief executive Andrew Travers.
(Yes, the second in command at our council has been employed for a long period under an arrangement similar to that which caused so much anger recently when Ed Lester, the chief executive of the Student Loans Company, was in the headlines.)
(Yes, the second in command at our council has been employed for a long period under an arrangement similar to that which caused so much anger recently when Ed Lester, the chief executive of the Student Loans Company, was in the headlines.)
UNISON CALLS ON ERIC PICKLES TO INVESTIGATE BARNET COUNCIL
UNISON, the UK’s largest union, is calling on the Secretary of State, Eric Pickles, to launch an immediate inquiry into the use of consultants at Barnet Council after public sector tax avoidance hit the headlines in the case of Ed Lester the Head of the Student Loans Company.
The union believes that the proper employment and procurement practices have not been followed exposing the Council to significant reputational and financial risks.
Eric Pickles has already had to step in and reprimand the council, after local residents and Barnet bloggers exposed the METPRO Audit scandal when METPRO a private security firm were awarded a contract at a cost of over a million pounds - without a tendering exercise, written contact or any proper invoicing - to ‘keep an eye’ on local bloggers.
Laura Butterfield, Regional Organiser at UNISON, said:
“We are really concerned that proper procedures have not been followed at Barnet Council. Over the last two years Barnet Council has employed a long list of consultants including the Deputy Chief Executive and Assistant Director of HR. Only an immediate inquiry can clarify the correct processes were followed. Given Danny Alexander’s intervention in the Ed Lester case last week how can we ensure that future cases are avoided unless all public sector employees are employed through the correct processes?"UNISON’s key concerns
We recommend that all spend over the stated threshold in the CPR be reviewed and matched to a central contracts register (in development) in a timely basis. This register needs to be drawn up in full and maintained.
- The Council has failed to comply with its Contract Procurement Regulations (CPR) and Financial Regulations by employing consultants without any procurement/selection process being followed.– which exposes it to significant reputational and financial risks.
- The Council does not have accurate and complete centrally held contracts register and effective monitoring arrangements so are unable to confirm if this is an isolated incident.
- The Council does not have a complete, centrally held register of contractors showing who is employed, on what basis and at what cost.
Back in February 2011 the local UNISON branch submitted a report to all 63 Barnet Councillors on 10 February where they made the following recommendation:
Recommendation
The Council undertakes as a matter of urgency a review of all payments to staff not employed directly by the Council.
Furthermore we recommend that the Council refer to the HMRC Guidelines in particular the advice to be found here that explains that “It's your responsibility to correctly determine the employment status of your workers - that is, whether they're employed by you or self-employed. This depends on the terms and conditions of your working relationship with each worker.
It's important to get your workers' employment status right because it affects the way tax and National Insurance contributions (NICs) are calculated for them. And it determines whether or not you have to operate PAYE (Pay As You Earn) on their earnings.”
Read full details here.
For comment or more information please contact Laura Butterfield: 07718 520850/l.butterfield@unison.co.uk
1. Student Loans chief 'to pay tax at source'
2. Pickles attacks Barnet Council
Monday, 7 November 2011
Barnet council on the brink: an open letter to Barnet residents
The MetPro scandal, exposed by Barnet Bloggers, was a shocking case of incompetence and poor practice that continued over a period of several years. It placed vulnerable people at risk but it took local residents only a few weeks to uncover the problems. On Friday 4 November an equally serious issue was uncovered, again by a Barnet Blogger; an issue that runs to the very heart of democracy in Barnet and in Britain.
On 16 May this year Barnet Council applied to the Information Commissioner’s Office to complain about one particular blogger, to question whether they should be registered under the Data Protection Act and to ask if they had breached the act. The Information Commissioner’s website suggests that if such a situation exists you should “First, tell the organisation concerned and give it an opportunity to put things right. Many data protection problems can be solved quickly without us getting involved”. Did Barnet Council inform the blogger concerned? No, it simply submitted the complaint.
On 7 June the Information Commissioner’s Office responded that it did not consider that a blogger should be registered as a data controller and had therefore not breached the Data Protection Act. For most organisations that would have been sufficient and they would have left the matter there. Not Barnet Council. They responded on 23 June citing a European Court of Justice judgement, not something which just comes immediately to hand. Appealing a decision of the Information Commissioner’s Office is not a step taken lightly. Taking this action must have required approval from someone very senior at Barnet Council and possibly involved taking legal advice.
The Information Commissioner’s Office responded to Barnet Council on 11 July again rejecting the Council’s complaint. It went on to say in its reply:
For all that Eric Pickles, the Secretary of State for Communities, talks about the need for armchair auditors, the reality is that local councils, and in this case a solidly Conservative Council, see them as a nuisance and something to be disarmed at all costs. The fact that a local authority should have worked so hard to stop citizens exercising their legal right to ask questions should be something of great concern to every single voter in Barnet.
Over the last few years the Council has looked increasingly out of touch with the community in which we all live. In recent months this tendency has escalated. A much more strident approach has been adopted by the most senior managers and cabinet members, an approach which is becoming unsustainable. The Bloggers of Barnet recognise that there are thousands of hard working council staff struggling to deliver good quality service whilst under immense pressure to cut costs and worrying whether their jobs are about to be privatised or deleted altogether. These people deserve our praise and recognition. It is the very top layer, the officers and consultants on six figure salaries and the Cabinet elite that work with them, that are the problem.
We call upon the Council leader to pause for reflection, for councillors to re-engage with their residents, and senior officers and councillors to start listening to citizens. This should include:
Signed
Derek Dishman
John Dix
Vicki Morris
Theresa Musgrove
Roger Tichborne
On 16 May this year Barnet Council applied to the Information Commissioner’s Office to complain about one particular blogger, to question whether they should be registered under the Data Protection Act and to ask if they had breached the act. The Information Commissioner’s website suggests that if such a situation exists you should “First, tell the organisation concerned and give it an opportunity to put things right. Many data protection problems can be solved quickly without us getting involved”. Did Barnet Council inform the blogger concerned? No, it simply submitted the complaint.
On 7 June the Information Commissioner’s Office responded that it did not consider that a blogger should be registered as a data controller and had therefore not breached the Data Protection Act. For most organisations that would have been sufficient and they would have left the matter there. Not Barnet Council. They responded on 23 June citing a European Court of Justice judgement, not something which just comes immediately to hand. Appealing a decision of the Information Commissioner’s Office is not a step taken lightly. Taking this action must have required approval from someone very senior at Barnet Council and possibly involved taking legal advice.
The Information Commissioner’s Office responded to Barnet Council on 11 July again rejecting the Council’s complaint. It went on to say in its reply:
“The balance of privacy versus freedom of expression relies on taking a proportionate approach. Requiring all bloggers to register with this office (ICO) and comply with the parts of the DPA exempted under Section 36 would, in our view, have a hugely disproportionate impact on freedom of expression”.This incident comes on top of changes to the borough’s constitution limiting debate in Council meetings, imposing draconian new rules for residents forums and disbanding the only committee able to scrutinise the One Barnet programme.
For all that Eric Pickles, the Secretary of State for Communities, talks about the need for armchair auditors, the reality is that local councils, and in this case a solidly Conservative Council, see them as a nuisance and something to be disarmed at all costs. The fact that a local authority should have worked so hard to stop citizens exercising their legal right to ask questions should be something of great concern to every single voter in Barnet.
Over the last few years the Council has looked increasingly out of touch with the community in which we all live. In recent months this tendency has escalated. A much more strident approach has been adopted by the most senior managers and cabinet members, an approach which is becoming unsustainable. The Bloggers of Barnet recognise that there are thousands of hard working council staff struggling to deliver good quality service whilst under immense pressure to cut costs and worrying whether their jobs are about to be privatised or deleted altogether. These people deserve our praise and recognition. It is the very top layer, the officers and consultants on six figure salaries and the Cabinet elite that work with them, that are the problem.
We call upon the Council leader to pause for reflection, for councillors to re-engage with their residents, and senior officers and councillors to start listening to citizens. This should include:
- The Council setting out in a public document fully and clearly what the One Barnet programme means for residents;
- Publishing all currently secret One Barnet reports;
- Allowing in-house team bids for all services;
- Stop putting out false information about bloggers; and
- Relax the rules and allow residents to ask any questions they like at the Residents Forums.
Signed
Derek Dishman
John Dix
Vicki Morris
Theresa Musgrove
Roger Tichborne
Thursday, 7 July 2011
A good day to bury bad news in Barnet? Nah!
On the day that Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Eric Pickles publicly lambasted Barnet council over its MetPro failings, its arrogance toward residents, bloggers in particular, and its lousy procurement practices, in front of the annual conference of the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA), the bottom has to fall out of Murdoch's media empire. You couldn't make it up.
As an NUJ colleague Rich Simcox tweeted earlier:
So I will report on our protest outside the HQ of Capita this evening, I will remind you that Capita and other multinationals (hm, multinationals...) are coming to Barnet council's offices tomorrow to be schmoozed (surely it should be the other way around) and enticed to bid for massive multi-million pound contracts to run the services that we've managed so far to run quite well ourselves - and not for profit - and I will crow once more over Eric Pickles siding with Barnet's bloggers against Barnet's complacent Conservative administration.
Rupert Murdoch, who he?
As an NUJ colleague Rich Simcox tweeted earlier:
Press officers, take the rest of the week off. You can forget that thing you were pitching. Whatever it was.No! We don't like things too easy in Barnet, we thrive on a challenge, we persist in trying to catch people's attention when all eyes are turned the other way.
So I will report on our protest outside the HQ of Capita this evening, I will remind you that Capita and other multinationals (hm, multinationals...) are coming to Barnet council's offices tomorrow to be schmoozed (surely it should be the other way around) and enticed to bid for massive multi-million pound contracts to run the services that we've managed so far to run quite well ourselves - and not for profit - and I will crow once more over Eric Pickles siding with Barnet's bloggers against Barnet's complacent Conservative administration.
Rupert Murdoch, who he?
Sunday, 17 April 2011
"Localism = giving power to local people" Eric Pickles
Like many of you, I'm sure, I watched Communities Minister Eric Pickles on Newsnight on Wednesday.
Gavin Esler failed to give Graham Chapman, deputy leader of Nottingham City Council, what he promised and get Eric Pickles to say what happens next year when further cuts have to be made and particularly poorer councils are squeezed yet further. Whereas Pickles insists that councils only have to cut 4.4% on average, the councils with the most deprivation are having to cut the most: Nottingham City Council is cutting 16% this year, Liverpool even more.
That failure aside, the whole feature was very interesting.
I was particularly struck by Pickles' insistence (a jibe he made against Graham Chapman):
His bonfire of the statutory duties (although he insists that he just wants to trim a bit, not cut such things as the need to make a policy to tackle homelessness) will be of interest most to council administrations.
(Although I am sure there is a new hobby for trainspotter-type ordinary citizens of combing through all the 1,294 duties on local authorities, accessible here if you want to try it yourself.)
However, we must make the most of what Pickles says about localism meaning rights for residents to have more information about what local government is doing, and, by implication, more power over it!
That means insisting on what he has said about residents' right to film from the public gallery at council meetings, and opposing vehemently the proposed reductions in residents' rights to question the council at residents forums.
Mrs Angry has a comprehensive post listing what the council is proposing in this regard. Here is yet another subject, I feel, on which we must correspond with Eric Pickles.
Much as I dislike the man's politics generally, we have to use what this Tory nationally is saying about residents' rights, against what "our" Tories are saying locally.
If you want to leave Minister Pickles a comment on any of the ways that Barnet council is trying to curtail residents' rights to scrutinise, you can do it here.
Gavin Esler failed to give Graham Chapman, deputy leader of Nottingham City Council, what he promised and get Eric Pickles to say what happens next year when further cuts have to be made and particularly poorer councils are squeezed yet further. Whereas Pickles insists that councils only have to cut 4.4% on average, the councils with the most deprivation are having to cut the most: Nottingham City Council is cutting 16% this year, Liverpool even more.
That failure aside, the whole feature was very interesting.
I was particularly struck by Pickles' insistence (a jibe he made against Graham Chapman):
I’m afraid the councillor seems to think that localism is about giving powers to councillors. It’s not. It’s about giving power to local people...There are many aspects of Pickles' "localism" agenda that do appear to give more power to local politicians, for example, he was promising to call in fewer planning applications than Labour did.
His bonfire of the statutory duties (although he insists that he just wants to trim a bit, not cut such things as the need to make a policy to tackle homelessness) will be of interest most to council administrations.
(Although I am sure there is a new hobby for trainspotter-type ordinary citizens of combing through all the 1,294 duties on local authorities, accessible here if you want to try it yourself.)
However, we must make the most of what Pickles says about localism meaning rights for residents to have more information about what local government is doing, and, by implication, more power over it!
That means insisting on what he has said about residents' right to film from the public gallery at council meetings, and opposing vehemently the proposed reductions in residents' rights to question the council at residents forums.
Mrs Angry has a comprehensive post listing what the council is proposing in this regard. Here is yet another subject, I feel, on which we must correspond with Eric Pickles.
Much as I dislike the man's politics generally, we have to use what this Tory nationally is saying about residents' rights, against what "our" Tories are saying locally.
If you want to leave Minister Pickles a comment on any of the ways that Barnet council is trying to curtail residents' rights to scrutinise, you can do it here.
Wednesday, 30 March 2011
A fly on the wall
It's too bad that I can't be at Barnet council's General Functions Committee meeting tomorrow night, since it will discuss extending to residents the right to blog, tweet and film from council meetings, a topic close to my heart.
Let's be clear, the council almost certainly wouldn't be discussing this at all if the blogging community and Barnet residents hadn't kicked up a stink at the fact that we had been stopped from filming and tweeting until now.
One new weapon in our armoury was the guidance issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government (itself, I suspect, promoted in part by the behaviour of Barnet council).
In fact, we made the council's rule a dead letter by filming and tweeting from the council meeting on 1 March. I understand Lynne Hillan told MetPro Security (where are they now?) shortly before the meeting itself not to stop us from filming (well, that's what I heard).
The choice before the committee tomorrow night is outlined as follows:
Unfortunately, the membership of the GFC does not include Daniel Seal, one of the Tory councillors for Hampstead Garden Suburb. He has been tweeting his support for the right to blog. But I don't suppose anyone in the inner circles of the council would listen to him anyway.
Garden Suburb residents have been cast into the outer darkness by the council lately: despised by Brian Coleman for their wealth - apparently, employing a nanny precludes you from being annoyed by the CPZ charge increases; and living in the only part of the borough that is clearly and unequivocally going to have its library closed.
On that topic, I'm glad to see that the Hampstead Garden Suburb Residents' Association has pledged to oppose the closure of the library.
Anyway, I can't get to the meeting tomorrow night but I'm still interested to see how the debate goes. Now, if we had filming of council meetings...
Let's be clear, the council almost certainly wouldn't be discussing this at all if the blogging community and Barnet residents hadn't kicked up a stink at the fact that we had been stopped from filming and tweeting until now.
One new weapon in our armoury was the guidance issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government (itself, I suspect, promoted in part by the behaviour of Barnet council).
In fact, we made the council's rule a dead letter by filming and tweeting from the council meeting on 1 March. I understand Lynne Hillan told MetPro Security (where are they now?) shortly before the meeting itself not to stop us from filming (well, that's what I heard).
The choice before the committee tomorrow night is outlined as follows:
If the Committee agrees that the existing position on filming and recording should be re-considered, there are two main options (although there are, of course, variations on these options):(Full paper available here.)
(i) Filming could be permitted by anyone in any Council or committee meeting, subject to it being non-disruptive; or
(ii) Webcasting of Council, Cabinet and other key committee meetings, with the public not permitted to film separately.
Unfortunately, the membership of the GFC does not include Daniel Seal, one of the Tory councillors for Hampstead Garden Suburb. He has been tweeting his support for the right to blog. But I don't suppose anyone in the inner circles of the council would listen to him anyway.
Garden Suburb residents have been cast into the outer darkness by the council lately: despised by Brian Coleman for their wealth - apparently, employing a nanny precludes you from being annoyed by the CPZ charge increases; and living in the only part of the borough that is clearly and unequivocally going to have its library closed.
On that topic, I'm glad to see that the Hampstead Garden Suburb Residents' Association has pledged to oppose the closure of the library.
Anyway, I can't get to the meeting tomorrow night but I'm still interested to see how the debate goes. Now, if we had filming of council meetings...
Wednesday, 2 March 2011
Transparency Barnet council style
Barnet council leader Lynne Hillan has budged. She has. I'm sure she'd deny it, but I will say it. After telling the Times series on Monday that there'd be no filming, blogging or tweeting in the public gallery while she is Leader (are you sure you want to bring that up, Lynne?), this morning she had made some attempt to appear reasonable. She told the Times that, although residents still would not be allowed to film the council meeting:
“I think the world has moved on since we last debated this. Frankly we all expect to be able to find the whole world on YouTube now.Well, that's it then, she's budged, and we'll hold her to it. She takes some shifting, does Lynne Hillan, but a good fortnight of harrying, and judicious use of the pronouncements in favour of transparency from her own government, plus one manic afternoon on phone and email to Bindmans, human rights lawyers (I have to thank them a lot for their work) have resulted in this grudging half-promise to bring Barnet into the 21st century.
"My own view is that the public would be best served by us live streaming council over the web, but this is a matter for the whole of council to debate. I am happy to have that debate at full council in the near future.”
Unlike some more frugally-minded bloggers, I think that the council should spend some money on getting the job done properly and having professional filming, as Haringey does, for example. And then, in addition to that, allowing blogging, filming and tweeting in the public gallery.
My own experience of filming in the public gallery was that it is pretty tedious, but then my equipment was a bit clapped out (and, to be frank, so was I). But AL managed to get some nice clips. See them here.
The interest with these clips is less the content - it's a council meeting, fer chrissakes! - than the fact that AL got these bits of film at all. Because AL and me, in my own feeble way, and Mrs A, all had to do our filming with the threat of being booted out hanging over us.
In the event, we were not booted out (I came close, for a bout of sustained heckling, but I won't bore you with the details of that now). Whatever the "legality" (huh!) of Barnet council's filming ban, at least among some parts of the council apparatus - some of the Tory group, some of the council officers: it's not clear who - there isn't the appetite to enforce it.
That's great news. It means the ban is a dead letter.
P.S. Oh, yeah, the g*ts passed their £54.4 million cuts and privatisation budget, but let's celebrate our tiny victories. On those, we build.
Monday, 28 February 2011
Is Lynne Hillan infringing my human rights?
Several members of Barnet's blogging community have spent much of today contemplating how to respond to Lynne Hillan's stubborn decision not to allow blogging, filming and tweeting in the public gallery at council meetings.
The decision relates mainly to Tuesday's council meeting, where the council is - alas - likely to adopt a plan for £54.4 million cuts. However, unless they change their minds, the ban will hold good for all council meetings.
So it is well worth challenging! I set out at lunchtime to get some legal advice and by 6pm was sending a solicitor's letter to Lynne Hillan.
It questions Hillan's decision on a number of grounds. One of them, the finest, I think, is that she is infringing my human rights. I suspect, however, that the one that will carry the most weight with Hillan is that she is flouting recent guidance from her own Conservative government, and the fact that the letter has been copied to Secretary of State Eric Pickles.
Let's see how Hillan responds. In any case, whether she relents or not, a number of Barnet residents plan to test her ruling by blogging, filming and tweeting in the public gallery on Tuesday night. The anti-cuts protest at Hendon Town Hall begins at 6pm, and the council meeting itself starts at 7pm.
The decision relates mainly to Tuesday's council meeting, where the council is - alas - likely to adopt a plan for £54.4 million cuts. However, unless they change their minds, the ban will hold good for all council meetings.
So it is well worth challenging! I set out at lunchtime to get some legal advice and by 6pm was sending a solicitor's letter to Lynne Hillan.
It questions Hillan's decision on a number of grounds. One of them, the finest, I think, is that she is infringing my human rights. I suspect, however, that the one that will carry the most weight with Hillan is that she is flouting recent guidance from her own Conservative government, and the fact that the letter has been copied to Secretary of State Eric Pickles.
Let's see how Hillan responds. In any case, whether she relents or not, a number of Barnet residents plan to test her ruling by blogging, filming and tweeting in the public gallery on Tuesday night. The anti-cuts protest at Hendon Town Hall begins at 6pm, and the council meeting itself starts at 7pm.
Friday, 25 February 2011
Our right to film and tweet
Eric Pickles' announcement in favour of residents being allowed (!) to use their social media devices to record council meetings - filming, tweeting and what have you - is accompanied by official guidance to councils. (Thanks to Dan Hope for drawing my attention to this.)
The letter is available here.
Dan will say that this shows the Tory government is committed to transparency. I suspect they are just bowing to the inevitable - you cannot hold back the tide of technological advance, and only look stupid if you try. This way, they get a bit of credit out of it.
There might be an undercurrent to this, that the Tories nationally continue to be embarassed by Barnet council (and other 'bad' Tory councils). I know that Eric Pickles, the Secretary of State, was informed about residents in Barnet being stopped from filming at last week's cabinet meeting.
As we know, rights are only active if you exercise them. Let's test this newly ceded right to film and tweet at the council meeting next Tuesday, 1 March. There will be a lobby against cuts from 6pm, outside Hendon Town Hall, and then residents can (I hope) go inside to watch the council meeting, which starts at 7pm.
I am printing off copies of the DCLG guidance to give to residents going into the meeting. If we do nothing else on Tuesday night, at least we can wave this letter in one hand and our cameraphones in the other at Brian Coleman while shouting 'smile for the camera' - obviously, that is only one suggestion for a slogan.
The letter is available here.
Dan will say that this shows the Tory government is committed to transparency. I suspect they are just bowing to the inevitable - you cannot hold back the tide of technological advance, and only look stupid if you try. This way, they get a bit of credit out of it.
There might be an undercurrent to this, that the Tories nationally continue to be embarassed by Barnet council (and other 'bad' Tory councils). I know that Eric Pickles, the Secretary of State, was informed about residents in Barnet being stopped from filming at last week's cabinet meeting.
As we know, rights are only active if you exercise them. Let's test this newly ceded right to film and tweet at the council meeting next Tuesday, 1 March. There will be a lobby against cuts from 6pm, outside Hendon Town Hall, and then residents can (I hope) go inside to watch the council meeting, which starts at 7pm.
I am printing off copies of the DCLG guidance to give to residents going into the meeting. If we do nothing else on Tuesday night, at least we can wave this letter in one hand and our cameraphones in the other at Brian Coleman while shouting 'smile for the camera' - obviously, that is only one suggestion for a slogan.
Wednesday, 23 February 2011
Citizen journalists of Barnet, unite! Council meeting, 1 March
On Monday 14 February an innocuous young man was threatened with expulsion from the public gallery at the Barnet cabinet meeting. His crime? Attempting to make a short film of proceedings on his phone.
How behind the times Barnet council shows itself to be. They act in a draconian manner to stop their own residents (to whom they are accountable) from using a piece of equipment that has become as everyday and routine as the pop-up toaster. Haven't they seen how people in the Middle East and North Africa are using social media to help them win their democracy?
I invite every resident coming to the council meeting at Hendon Town Hall next Tuesday 1 March to come with their cameraphones at the ready. Perhaps Brian Coleman will learn some manners if he knows that what he says will end up on YouTube for all the world to see before the night is out.
Oh, and who is this agreeing with the call for greater openness? This is a statement made today by none other than Eric Pickles, the Conservative Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government:
How behind the times Barnet council shows itself to be. They act in a draconian manner to stop their own residents (to whom they are accountable) from using a piece of equipment that has become as everyday and routine as the pop-up toaster. Haven't they seen how people in the Middle East and North Africa are using social media to help them win their democracy?
I invite every resident coming to the council meeting at Hendon Town Hall next Tuesday 1 March to come with their cameraphones at the ready. Perhaps Brian Coleman will learn some manners if he knows that what he says will end up on YouTube for all the world to see before the night is out.
Oh, and who is this agreeing with the call for greater openness? This is a statement made today by none other than Eric Pickles, the Conservative Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government:
"Many councils are internet-savvy and stream meetings online, but some don't seem to have caught up with the times and are refusing to let bloggers or hyper-local news sites in. With local authorities in the process of setting next year's budget this is more important than ever.
"Opening the door to new media costs nothing and will help improve public scrutiny. The greater powers and freedoms that we are giving local councils must be accompanied by stronger local accountability.
"We are in the digital age and [the] analogue interpretation of the press access rules is holding back a new wave of local scrutiny, accountability and armchair auditors."
Tuesday, 3 August 2010
Eric Pickles or Barnet Conservative group? There's only one way to find out...
The Times series has caught up with Barnet councillors Kate and Brian Salinger after they were invited to tea by Eric Pickles, secretary of state for communities and local government. This happened a few days ago; the invitation was meant to signal the Tory government's displeasure with Barnet Tories.
Kate Salinger, you will remember, was stripped of her council responsibilities by the Barnet Tory group after she abstained in a vote that raised the allowances for the council leader and cabinet members.
Brian Salinger was absent the night the vote was taken, but has aid he would have abstained as well. Read the Times article here and admire the pic.
I wouldn't enjoy tea with Eric Pickles, in fact, I think I'd choke on my fishpaste and cucumber sandwiches, but it certainly is interesting to see the upset in the Tory party over Barnet's tendency to go its own way.
Until recently, Barnet was enjoying a reputation as a trailblazer in local government circles (undeserved, I think), but under Lynne Hillan and Brian Coleman it is now blazing trails to places the government doesn't want to be seen going.
Kate Salinger, you will remember, was stripped of her council responsibilities by the Barnet Tory group after she abstained in a vote that raised the allowances for the council leader and cabinet members.
Brian Salinger was absent the night the vote was taken, but has aid he would have abstained as well. Read the Times article here and admire the pic.
I wouldn't enjoy tea with Eric Pickles, in fact, I think I'd choke on my fishpaste and cucumber sandwiches, but it certainly is interesting to see the upset in the Tory party over Barnet's tendency to go its own way.
Until recently, Barnet was enjoying a reputation as a trailblazer in local government circles (undeserved, I think), but under Lynne Hillan and Brian Coleman it is now blazing trails to places the government doesn't want to be seen going.
Wednesday, 21 July 2010
What hope for Liverpool and any of us? Bring back the working classes
Three of my grandparents are buried within spitting distance of the Mersey, and my dad grew up there, so I claim a tenuous connection with Liverpool. When I first started visiting it regularly in the late 1980s it was a dreary place, suffering high unemployment and reeling from deep cuts to public services. I would say it's only just bobbing along now. How is it going to emerge from the coming age of austerity? Back to square one?
David Cameron launched his Big Society agenda there on Monday. Did he have a more valid reason for choosing Liverpool than the corny symbolism of holding his press conference at Liverpool Hope University? Yes, Liverpool, apparently, has volunteered to be one of four "vanguard communities", although someone might have told them:
Who are these able, capable individuals passively receiving state aid? I assume he is talking about the people he wants to drive off benefits (or, in less sensitive Tory tabloid-speak, "benefits-scroungers")? Or is he talking about wider circles of people, those of us who turn up to our local hospital and expect to find it open? He either needs to spell things out more... or drop the hyperbolic rhetoric.
He has claimed that the Big Society agenda is not just an attempt to prettify the cuts. But he brings along Eric Pickles, communities secretary, to play hard cop. Here's Pickles on Radio 4:
The Guardian publishes an excellent set of reasoned objections to Big Society on its letters page today. This is one of the best:
There is one actor that has not figured in all of Cameron's calculations and it is the working class, I mean the self-conscious working class, understanding its history. Before the advent of the welfare state, sure, there was philanthropy but a lot of it was, frankly, cranky stuff shaped by the preoccupations of the middle- and upper-class people delivering it. Coverage was patchy and it was wholly inadequate. Historians of the lower orders have shown that the working class basically survived through its own support networks, with poor people helping out the poorer as best they could. And you could go out without locking your door... That was community, that was Big Society. But it was class society.
Who were the greatest enthusiasts for the Big State? Who, recalling the horrors of the 30s, clamoured for it after the Second World War? The working clases. They are not anywhere in Cameron's calculations, and it is time they began to assert themselves again. Big Society will not bring hope to Liverpool, the working class might.
David Cameron launched his Big Society agenda there on Monday. Did he have a more valid reason for choosing Liverpool than the corny symbolism of holding his press conference at Liverpool Hope University? Yes, Liverpool, apparently, has volunteered to be one of four "vanguard communities", although someone might have told them:
Some of the local partners in the "vanguard communities" that David Cameron said will lead his "big society" revolution were uncertain about what being in the vanguard will involve.Who are these vanguard communities and what is planned for them?
Many involved in the voluntary sector had been given limited information, and some were warning that voluntary organisations hit by funding cuts will be hard pushed to deliver more.
"We don't know how it's going to work," a spokesman for Liverpool city council said. "We have been given no information about this."
[Rachel Williams and Rajeev Syal, Guardian, 19 July]
Liverpool, the Eden Valley in Cumbria, Windsor and Maidenhead in Berkshire and Sutton in south-west London will become "vanguard communities". All four authorities approached the government to experiment with running the parts of their public services they think they can administer better.Personally, I find the whole idea of Big Society unconvincing and deeply patronising. This is Cameron from his launch speech:
They may have central government budgets handed over to them to administer at street level, attempt to improve local transport links themselves, take over command of local assets such as pubs and community services, have a greater say over planning permission or local transport and, in the case of Liverpool, allow volunteers to keep a popular local museum open for longer hours.
...The government will also announce the creation of a "Big Society Bank" to help finance social enterprises, charities and voluntary groups. The money will come from dormant bank and building society accounts – the amount is thought to be as much as £400m.
[Allegra Stratton, Guardian, 19 July]
For years there was the basic assumption at the heart of government that the way to improve things in society was to micromanage from the centre, from Westminster. But this just doesn't work. It has turned able, capable, individuals into passive recipients of state help with little hope for a better future. It has turned lively communities into dull, soulless clones of one another.What is he on about? Could he give us some concrete examples? I assume he has no plans to stop supermarkets building "soulless" out-of-town and close-to-town shopping developments, that suck the lifeblood out of high streets? When high street shops close and are taken over by charity shops, that's a good thing, right? Is that Big Society? Well, he's hoping that more and more public services will be run by charities...
Who are these able, capable individuals passively receiving state aid? I assume he is talking about the people he wants to drive off benefits (or, in less sensitive Tory tabloid-speak, "benefits-scroungers")? Or is he talking about wider circles of people, those of us who turn up to our local hospital and expect to find it open? He either needs to spell things out more... or drop the hyperbolic rhetoric.
He has claimed that the Big Society agenda is not just an attempt to prettify the cuts. But he brings along Eric Pickles, communities secretary, to play hard cop. Here's Pickles on Radio 4:
Even at a time when money is tight it is still possible to find different ways of delivering. It is unashamedly about getting more for less. But it is about passing power down to folks so you can start to mould your own neighbourhood and put something back in.Put something back in? What if you don't have anything to start with? Again, Cameron says this is not just a return to patchwork Victorian philanthropy, but if Big Society really takes off - I'm not sure it can, I'm not sure we can turn back the clock that far without major upheaval! - that's what it would be.
The Guardian publishes an excellent set of reasoned objections to Big Society on its letters page today. This is one of the best:
The ability of community and voluntary groups to significantly increase their role in delivering public services is not easy. They will need time and space to grow and develop local delivery options. For this to happen, the government will have to be more interventionist and reform procurement practice away from raw market "efficiencies" toward effectiveness, the local, and less traditional commercial public service providers. If the government does this it will be fettering the speed and scale of contracts given to the private sector. For the government to create its "big society" it will have to intervene in the public sector market.In Barnet the council wants to hand over delivery of most council services to a big private sector contractor, where's our Big Society? And it stops residents asking the questions they want to ask of local government, where's our Big Society?
Some used to say the public sector crowds out the commercial sector. Now the commercial sector is in danger of crowding out civil society and fettering the "big society". Has the government the stomach for this, or will "big society" actually come to mean big business?
Neil McInroy, Chief executive, Centre for Local Economic Strategies
There is one actor that has not figured in all of Cameron's calculations and it is the working class, I mean the self-conscious working class, understanding its history. Before the advent of the welfare state, sure, there was philanthropy but a lot of it was, frankly, cranky stuff shaped by the preoccupations of the middle- and upper-class people delivering it. Coverage was patchy and it was wholly inadequate. Historians of the lower orders have shown that the working class basically survived through its own support networks, with poor people helping out the poorer as best they could. And you could go out without locking your door... That was community, that was Big Society. But it was class society.
Who were the greatest enthusiasts for the Big State? Who, recalling the horrors of the 30s, clamoured for it after the Second World War? The working clases. They are not anywhere in Cameron's calculations, and it is time they began to assert themselves again. Big Society will not bring hope to Liverpool, the working class might.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
