Can Barnet Tories vote according to conscience?

Mark Shooter, if the rumours are correct, only avoided becoming leader of the Barnet Tory group on Tuesday night by one vote (he's rumoured to have got 18 votes to Lynne Hillan's 19). I don't know what they put in the water at the Town Hall but Shooter's comments to the Times series afterwards sound distinctly sheeplike:

Speaking after the meeting, Hendon ward councillor, Mr Shooter, said he would now work with his party colleagues for the good of the borough.

He said: “I am happy to say that I will support unity and work with the group for the sake of the people of Barnet.

“Obviously I am disappointed after receiving tremendous support. I would like to thank my supporters but I accept the decision as being fully democratic.

“I will do my part to get behind the group and make sure the authority and the councillors do the best for the borough.”

From this, you wouldn't think that all hell had just been unleashed in the Barnet Tory group - publicly, at that. I can only think that during the meeting, which I understand to have gone on for three hours, an awful lot of air was cleared.

The odds of Shooter and his supporters backing the no confidence vote in Hillan next Tuesday appear to have lengthened considerably.

So, this is my question now. Do Shooter and those who backed him believe that the Tory group should vote with their conscience in future or simply toe the line?

This matters because Shooter highlighted a number of issues in his final pitch to councillors before Tuesday night where he is wildly at odds with the current leadership. Those issues, with my interpretation/comment in brackets, are:

"...fully erase the decisions of that flawed Council meeting of July 13th; the allowances will then revert to the previously agreed scheme." (We should reverse the rise in senior Cabinet members' allowances and the rise in allowances for committee chairs.)

"...leadership is a lot more than cobbling together some decisions with a few friends and then bullying others into submission." (Does it include allowing councillors to vote according to conscience?)

"Before Labour’s change to the law in 2000, all Councillors ran the Council. This had worked well for a very long time." (Exclusive rule by Cabinet should end.)

"Why, if our highly paid directors are so skilled in local government affairs do we need to spend millions of pounds on consultants? One or the other has got to go." (Look to your laurels, Nick Walkley et al.)

"I do not believe Soviet bureaucratic initiatives like One Public Sector, Labour’s Total Place (and Barnet’s Future Shape / Easy Council) ideas are not [sic] the way forward." (Needs no comment!)

"...we can avoid morally dubious decisions such as the scrapping of the warden service, the closing of libraries and the selling off of the allotments." (Could Shooter support it at a council meeting should the wardens cut be voted on again? Could he in all conscience vote to close a library, should that question arise?)

Shooter and his supporters might - or might not! We'll know on Tuesday - have decided to close ranks for the good of the Barnet Tory party, and they might have screwed some commitments out of Hillan et al on the strength of the vote on Tuesday night. But how long could such an arrangement last? And how foolish would Shooter look if he now voted at variance with the manifesto he outlined during his challenge?

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.

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.

Barnet has leave to appeal wardens decision

Barnet council has been given leave to appeal the High Court's decision that their plan to axe sheltered housing wardens was unlawful. But will they appeal? Portsmouth council, which also lost at the High Court, has said that it will.

Here is a press release from campaigner David Young, of Kingsley Court in Barnet, telling all the major parties that if they do not reverse the cuts in warden services they should not expect any vote of the 500,000 or so sheltered housing residents in the UK. No warden, no vote!

Times series report.

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.

Pressure on Lib Dems as Portsmouth council appeals wardens judgement

When Barnet sheltered housing residents won their legal case against Barnet Tory council's decision to axe their wardens, Lib Dem Portsmouth Council was in the dock as well, and their legal case went against them also.

David Young, Barnet campaigner, has written to the leaders of all the main parties calling on them to prevent the cuts. So far, only Lib Dem party leader Nick Clegg has not replied. David Young has written to him again, demanding to know his position, and also objecting to Portsmouth council's decision to appeal the court's ruling.

Read David Young's letter below, and scroll down for a call to arms.

The Labour government removed the ringfence around the sheltered housing wardens budget and has it in its power to change the regulations so that the cuts need not be made - it still has time to do this before the general election. Lib Dem and Tory councils around the country have the power to stop and reverse the cuts they have made to this service.

I believe that popular opinion is against these cuts. Can we impose our view and save the wardens? Well, it is still, even at this late hour, worth the battle.

Let's see whether Barnet council follow Portsmouth's decision to appeal... If you want to write to your councillor and ask them to come out against the cuts (in the case of Tory councillors - Lib Dem and Labour in Barnet are against the cuts), you can find their details here.

Carry on Campaigning – my 2010 resolutions

This is what I resolve to do in 2010:

Defend sheltered housing

Continue to campaign against the axing of sheltered housing wardens – in Barnet, where it is being carried out by the nasty Tories, and nationally where it is being carried out by the nasty Tories and nasty Lib Dems – not forgetting that it’s the fault of nasty Labour in the first place for removing the ring fence from the Supporting People budget.

Barnet’s Tories, predominantly the woman who is now leader of the council, Lynne Hillan, thought this would go through without too much opposition – anger, yes, but not actual opposition. They were wrong, there has been a vigorous campaign led mainly by Barnet’s own David Young, plus Sheltered Housing UK (SHUK) and Barnet Community Campaign (BCC) and Barnet trades council.

And, with a little help from Judge Milwyn Jarman QC, the move to axe has now been ruled ILLEGAL. Barnet council’s only recourse, if they want to persist in making these cuts, is to appeal the legal decision. Are they politically hard-nosed enough – in other words, sufficiently NASTY - to do it, especially with the council elections looming?

Future Shape of Barnet council

Continue to insist that Barnet residents should shape their own future, not have a budget airlines model of council service delivery foisted upon them. The trades council and BCC will seek residents’ views, and debate the issues raised by the Tories’ proposals, for example, to fast-track planning applications where applicants are prepared to pay a bit extra. We will press the Tories to specify what they regard as core services and what as extras that residents will have to pay more on top of the council tax they already pay to receive.

Cut the social roots of the far-right

Combat the threat posed by the far-right BNP, EDL and others. Campaign for better public services, housing and jobs for all, in place of a vision of society where those at the bottom must fight among themselves for the basics. The UK is a rich country – we only need to distribute the wealth, the power and the decision-making more evenly. Racism is an ignorant ideology; we need to argue against it, but also to fight the social rot in which far-right movements can grow.

Personal goals

Exercise more; sort out finances, yadda, yadda, yadda... Happy new year to you all!

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.

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.

Stay of execution for Barnet's sheltered housing wardens

Barnet council's plans to remove the wardens from sheltered housing schemes in the borough are on hold as campaigners have won an injunction. Read all about it here in the Guardian.

Congratulations to Yvonne Hossacks' team and the indomitable sheltered housing residents of Barnet who are not giving in easily.

Stick up for thorns in the side of the establishment!

Congratulations to Roger Tichborne for his victory against Barnet mayor Brian Coleman. I haven't done justice to Roger's triumph because I've been having a difficult time at home, too dreary to detail. But it really cheered me up this evening to read all about Roger's victory on his blog (look for the other posts on this as well).

Another thorn in the side of the complacent Tory councillors of Barnet (and other local authorities and parties) is Yvonne Hossacks, who has won a stay of execution for Barnet's sheltered housing wardens. She faces a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal next week, following complaints made against her by various councils. Sheltered housing residents in Barnet who have benefited from Yvonne's support in their campaign to save their wardens have written this letter asking for people to go and support her:

Solicitor Yvonne Hossacks needs your help at Court Tribunal

12/09/09

Dear Tenants,

Solicitor Yvonne Hossacks is being taken to court by several councils who want her struck off for trying to save the wardens. The reasons are

1) Improperly encouraging clients to court politicians and media
2) Not acting in the client’s best interests
3) Making too many time consuming and costly applications to the councils

All ridiculous, I hope you agree!

The Tribunal is on the 14th, 15th and 16th September at 3rd Floor, Gate House, 1 Farringdon Street EC4M 7NS.

There will be a protest at the court to support Yvonne each morning from 9-9.30am to let the court know how much we appreciate what she is doing for us. We cannot provide transport, but hope you will be able to attend the protest.

Yours Sincerely,

Mrs Betty Martin,
Co Chairperson,
UK Pensioners Strategy Committee,
Email: ukpensioners@googlemail.com

Viv Todd takes her wardens message to Trafalgar Square

In spite of the persistent drizzle and excessive use of horn, I had a great time between 6-7pm in Trafalgar Square yesterday, Wednesday 26 August, when Viv Todd from Southwark took to the fourth plinth. See the video here.

Viv used most of her hour to talk about the sheltered housing warden cuts. We had a good turnout of supporters, including from Barnet. In fact, there was probably a wider range of organisations and groups involved than at previous protests. There were even some YOUNG PEOPLE there, who have set up a Facebook group to highlight the cuts.

Watching the video you can see that Viv got the message across very well, she was probably distracted by the fact that we couldn't hear her on the ground and kept shouting at her to talk louder! Tip for other plinthers: talk to yourself not the people on the ground - the cameras and microphones pick you up well (swearing included).

Viv also did a good job on breakfast TV taking on Imogen Parry, from ERoSH, which likes to pose as the voice of sheltered housing, but only represents the institutional interests of the providers, not of the residents. They are in favour of the floating support and hub plans.

There should be some good pics available soon. The next protest in Barnet is next week, on Tuesday 1st September. We will attend the Cabinet meeting - but have been debarred from putting any more questions on the issue for six months as we have already raised it! As if there could not be any more questions when, for example, the details of the floating support become known.

Big Brother is there to help the elderly, honest

I've just enjoyed, if that is the word, the Panorama episode "Gimme Shelter" about the cuts to sheltered housing wardens around the country, and the campaign against them. It featured Barnet council in the last segment, taking the decision to cut wardens, against the overwhelming opposition of the sheltered housing residents.

The whole programme is viewable here.

The aspect that most alarmed me about the programme is highlighted on the Panorama website: "How cutting edge kit helps the elderly". Kit, for heaven's sake!

If you watched the programme, you will have seen a different side to this: the kit that told a remote monitor whether you have been out of bed too long, sat in a cold room too long, fallen over... I'm sure all this assistive technology has its place, but it can't replace the human touch.

In the programme, a remote team guided by assistive technology was summoned by a sheltered housing resident who had been shopping and now could not find her purse. The trouble is, no one knew that that was what had happened. The A-Team to the rescue! An onsite warden could have helped the woman in five minutes with little fuss, and she would have seen a familiar face, to boot.

An onsite warden could also deal with the far more serious work of finding people who have fallen and cannot reach their panic cord/button or whatever other 'kit' might have been provided. That might have saved the life of the poor woman in Yeovil who lay in the fireplace for days and whose bitter son appeared on the programme.

All in all, I thought it was an excellent programme, well reported by Vivian White, only marred by a patronising introduction and ending from Jeremy Vine, exclaiming over the fact that the 'elderly are on the march' - why wouldn't they, like anyone else, be active in defence of their interests?

It is good that this issue is not over when it looks like it is over. Northampton residents, who featured heavily in the programme, are still protesting about the sheltered housing warden cuts, two years after they have gone through. All the signs are that Barnet campaigners will continue their fight.

For starters, join us this Wednesday, 26 August, at 5.30pm in Trafalgar Square, where we will be supporting Viv Todd on the fourth plinth.

Mike Freer's Barnet Council: famous for all the wrong reasons

Next week, 24 August, Monday night's BBC "Panorama" programme is due to focus on the cuts to sheltered housing wardens around the country. There is a small report here in the Northampton Chronicle.

Mike Freer's Barnet Council is likely to feature heavily in the programme, famous for all the wrong reasons. Some of the supporters of the sheltered housing campaign, that opposes the cuts to wardens in Barnet, will gather to watch the programme together. Make sure you have a look on Monday night.

Barnet residents defy SOCPA and deliver letter to PM

The sheltered housing demo yesterday was not huge (100?) but it was good - a chance to meet other figures involved in campaigning on the issue nationally. So, I met Vernon Yarker, the able, amiable and dedicated chair of Sheltered Housing UK; Joe Oldman of Age UK (working title of the merged Age Concern and Help the Aged); crusading lawyer Yvonne Hossacks; Geoffrey Cox MP (yes, a Tory, who is opposing sheltered housing cuts and who will try to get a debate on this in Parliament next session); plus residents from around the UK, including a colourful delegation from the Oysters sheltered housing scheme in Whitstable, Kent.

Alan Schneiderman, Barnet Labour councillor, attended and there was a good delegation from Barnet's own Kingsley Court, despite one of their two minibuses breaking down in Swiss Cottage forcing them all to pack into one van to reach the protest.

Protests in the vicinity of Parliament are strictly policed, under the terms of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, abbreviated to SOCPA. I think the police tend to enforce the terms more strictly when the crowd is small. The enormous Tamil protests against the attacks on Tamil areas of Sri Lanka were clearly too big to deal with by invoking SOCPA. However, a modest gathering of elderly people and their friends fits the bill perfectly for a bit of petty bullying and rule-mongering. So we were told off for:

- gathering on the paved area, which belongs to the GLA, and not on the grass, which belongs to Westminster council (at a guess);

- having more than one film crew in attendance;

- shouting slogans whilst having our picture taken;

- using a loudhailer close to Parliament.

If they could have gotten away with it, they would probably have told us off for 'walking slowly in a built-up area'. The elderly people for whom it was a great effort to attend refused to be bullied, just as they had refused to be bullied off the grass in front of Hendon town hall when we held our protest in June.

I cannot fault the police too much - for our walk up Whitehall to Downing Street, they let us march on the road, which was quite a thrill. Most of us waited in a fenced area opposite Downing Street while a delegation went to deliver a letter to the PM. Leading the delegation was Joan Bakewell, who looked great and did a piece to camera for some programme or other. Maybe for the "Panorama" programme about sheltered housing, due for broadcast in August.

On a personal note, I did not end up on television on the day despite two near misses, the second when BBC London News chose to interview Dame Joan rather than me - I suppose there couldn't be a better person to be upstaged by. Joan Bakewell is to sheltered housing what Joanna Lumley was to the Gurkhas - we hope.

Sheltered housing national demonstration, 12.30, Wednesday 22 July, Parliament Square

As became clear when we campaigned to save the wardens in Barnet, the cuts to sheltered housing are a national issue. Along with the work of Sheltered Housing UK, and Hendon MP Andrew Dismore's raising the issue in Parliament, our own efforts in Barnet have helped to force a belated national debate on this issue (although still not on the scale that it deserves).

"Panorama" in August will cover sheltered housing; several Barnet celebrities and notorieties will feature in it. One of the stars of the show is David Young, the chair of Kingsley Court Strategy Committee, who lives at one of the sheltered housing schemes due to lose its warden.

Dave has ploughed his own furrow, pretty much, seeing what needed to be done and doing it. As well as building the protests organised by Barnet Community Campaign, he organised a petition which Kingsley Court residents handed in to 10 Downing Street in May; Kingsley Court residents turned up en masse at the surgery of their councillor Joan Scannell in Edgware; and Dave arranged for BBC News to interview residents on the day that the council decided to cut wardens.

Now the Kingsley Court campaigners have got permission for a long-overdue national demonstration on the issue of sheltered housing. It assembles at 12.30 in Parliament Square, on Wednesday 22 July. Then a letter will be handed in to 10 Downing Street; the delegation will include Joan Bakewell.

The gist of the message to Gordon Brown is:

“Pensioners from sheltered housing schemes throughout England demand the Government reverse their policy on sheltered housing, so councils will reinstate sheltered wardens. The Government says they can’t intervene, because this is a local government issue. We have come from across the nation and are all affected — this is a national issue! Take responsibility for once, Gordon, and sort it out.”

More details on the Barnet TUC website.

Warden cuts do not mean the end of the battle

Northampton residents of sheltered housing marched yesterday to protest against the level of service they have been receiving through the floating support since their resident wardens were axed by the council.

A report in the Northampton Chronicle explains:

About 50 elderly people from across the town took part in a march through the middle of Northampton yesterday to highlight cuts to services which mean many of them now only receive visits from wardens once a month.

In Barnet too the council can be sure that their decision to remove the wardens will not be the end of the story.

Barnet's Conservative Cabinet swings the axe on sheltered housing

A quick report from the Cabinet meeting tonight. In short, as we feared they would, Barnet’s Conservative Cabinet voted to cut the sheltered housing wardens, saving the council a fairly paltry £400,000 but at a high social cost.

Council Leader Mike Freer dealt in his characteristically graceless manner with a lot of angry voters: his mantra on these occasions is becoming, well, if you don’t like it, you can vote us out next year. Mike “cross-in-a-box-once-every-four-years” Freer’s vision of democracy.

We held a lively protest that got a lot of press coverage – the assault on sheltered housing is, belatedly, becoming a national issue. You can see the BBC London news report here.

Mike Freer is interviewed and says: “The council’s finances are actually quite robust, so that’s not the driver. The driver is predominantly about making a service fit for purpose. ...we have about 15 hundred settings, a thousand of them already have a floating, visiting warden, only one third have a resident warden.”

If financial considerations are not the driver, why is one of the main points in the consultation document:

Barnet Council is proposing three major changes:
To reduce the amount of funding paid at present for services in sheltered housing and similar locations. This would contribute toward reductions in expenditure that are necessary for Barnet Council to set a balanced budget for next year....

Proposal 1 – reduction in funding for support services in sheltered housing
The council has to make savings of £12 million next year, and it proposes that services for older people in Sheltered Housing should contribute £950,000 to this total....

The rest of the savings of £950,000 each year would be used by the council to enable services for older people in Barnet to be maintained. Next year, the council will have to make savings of £12m in order to make sure expenditure is in line with income.

In the document, there is a lot more, an awful lot more, along those lines. In short, in the news clip Freer is not telling the truth about why they want to make this cut.

They say it is so that they can spend more money on other elderly residents in Barnet – show us the figures. Vague promises about extending the residual sheltered housing support service to other Barnet elderly are just that: vague promises. We have consistently called for levelling up of services, not levelling down: sharing a far smaller budget among many more people is no way to increase 'fairness'.

The sheltered housing warden cut is about saving Barnet council money; the rest is justification. I could find a reason to make cuts, if I wanted to make cuts. The point is I don't. Freer goes on and on about how central government’s settlement for Barnet is too low: then lead the community in a fight for more money. And stop justifying and making cuts!