Book Review - Mammoth Boy by John Hart

Of all the Barnet Councillors, perhaps the most colourful is John Hart. John doesn't mince his words and one suspects that he started his career in Barnet when the minutues of meetings were transcribed on parchments, using quill pens and only the finest octopus ink. Unlike many of his colleagues, John is highly educated and used to be a lecturer. He also has a keen interest in literature and has recently written a book. I bumped into John a couple of weeks ago in Waitrose car park. I was off to buy some fish fingers for supper and pulled up next to him, just as he was loading a couple of cases of the finest Ruby Port, a side of venison and a dozen of the finest quails eggs into his 1957 Armstrong Siddley (actually I've rather egged this up, but if the meeting were a Hollywood film, that is most certainly how it would happen).  Anyway, as ever we had a brief chat. I asked John how his book sales were progressing and he said "I'm down to the last few". He then gave me a copy and I promised to review it. I cannot think of another Barnet Conservative Councillor who's prose I'd bother to read. For a bit of fun I thought I'd construct a list of possible books they could have written :-

"Brian Salinger - My Part in his downfall" by Brian Coleman
"Sheep farming in Barnet" by Daniel Thomas
"101 Uses for a dead Twat" by Robert Ramsbottom
"50 Shades of Grey" by Helena Hart
"Smoking is Good for You" by Thomas Davey

Interestingly, I googled "Book about a friendly Parking Warden" for a book for Dean Cohen and not a single title came up. Anyway, as far as I know, John Hart is alone in being a published author amongst the Barnet Councillors. I took the book away to France with me, to read on the plane. Knowing John, I expected it to be a decent read. I rather suspected that as the subject was a boy growing up in Stone Age Spain, there would be much ravishing of fulsome blondes from the tribe next door along with the decimation of the liberal namby pambies who ran said tribe. I expected a bit of neolithic capitalism, with red blooded heros getting the girl and the loot (or at least a few Mammoth steaks) !

In actual fact, the book is a very gripping read. Sadly, there is no ravishing of fair maidens. Mammoth Boy Urrell is struggling to survive in a very harsh world of nomadic tribes. He is taken under the wing of the mysterious Agaratz, who has various maladies and many mystic powers, which would in this day and age entitle him to a free disabled parking ticket in Barnet (oops sorry just read that they are going up to £10). Agaratz teaches Urrell that you must respect nature to survive. When you take a birds egg to survive, only take one, so that the bird will have a chick to hatch and carry on the breed. When berries are plentiful, don't kill animals for food. When food is scarce, share it with the animals. Agaratz also teaches Mammoth boy the beauty of art and music and introduces him to the joys of psychedelic drugs, in the form of mysterious magic mushrooms., used by the shamen to see ancient times (I wonder if John's own experiences were drawn from ;^) ).

As Urrell grows stronger, he is taught how to fight and defend himself, but always with honour and dignity. Eventually Agaratz and Urrell set off on a mission (with Urrell's wolf and an old, starving and dying lion, who they have befriended during the harsh winter months). They visit magical places and see strange things (Blind fish, Geyzers). They arrive at the gathering of the clans. Urrell has many tasks to prove himself a man. His prize is a maiden fair (although one who he respects rather than ravishes).

I enjoyed the book and would recommend it to anyone with an interest in stories of ancient times. It is well written and researched and vivid in it's storytelling. It would make a great Disneyesque story (although they'd probably ruin it). You can get the book from Amazon here - http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mammoth-Boy-ebook/dp/B008MZJ63C - and you can even download it onto your kindle.

Fair play to John for proving not every Barnet Tory is a complete philistine (in fact he's probably the only one who actually knows what the classical definition of a  philistine really is).  I was left wondering if  deep in Johns true blue soul, there is a liberal lefty screaming to get out. I read the book effortlessly and like all entertaining books, I was left wondering what happened next and wishing it was a little longer. Recommended.

Barnet Council Cabinet Meeting 2012/2/2012 - full report

Please see the video in the previous post for a lour of public questions. A couple of words of praise first. for Richard Cornelius. Since the start of the blog, I've sat through these meetings during the reign of four leaders. These have been Mike Freer, Lynne Hillan, Andrew Harper (who sat in for Hillan during her illness) and now Richard Cornelius. Unlike the first three, at least Richard is civil and polite. Manners and courtesy cost nothing. I may not agree with much of what Richard says, but at least he is a decent man who reaslises that you don't need to behave boarishly with members of the public. Perhaps the best example of this can be seen in the contrasting answers to my question regarding the poor usage of English in a Council report. Councillor Robert Rams, who clearly holds the public in complete contempt, replied to my request to say who reviewed the badly written report saying "I did" and then went on to say that if that was the only thing I could find to criticise (which it clearly wasn't) then he'd won the argument. Richard Cornelius, recognising that Rams was clearly making a fool of himself and the whole cabinet interjected "I also read it and I apologise". To many people, it may count for nothing, but I respect that. The mark of a man. Another example of the fact that Richard is at least trying to make his colleagues acknowledge the existence of the voters of Barnet came when Councillor John Marshall stepped up to make a speech about education. He wryly commented "When I was in the cabinet, these meetings were far shorter". He was clearly annoyed at having to hang around, whilst the public had their say. Richard Cornelius replied "That's democracy". Marshall sneered "managed democracy". Clearly, unlike the Leader, he really isn't that bothered with keeping the public in the loop. It is worth noting that Councillor Marshall was a big supporter of Councillor Andrew Harper, who Richard Cornelius defeated last year to become leader. Whatever you may think of Richard and his administration, I for one am glad that at least we have someone who recognises the public need to be involved in the democratic process.

So what other issues were discussed. The use of Parks as revenue generators was a big topic. Two Labour Councillors, Jim Tierney and Alan Schneiderman both made representations to the Cabinet. Both made valid points, both were completely ignored. Tierney stated that the proposal to rent parks could take the parks out of use for 12 weekends in the Spring and summer. The public could be deprived of use of the parks for 50% of the summer. In compensation for this loss, the Council would generate £30,000 in revenue. This is less than the cost of the wages of the Council officer who will oversee the scheme. Tierney felt that this was financial ineptitude. He was disappointed that the council did not seem to understand the difference between revenue and profit.

Richard Cornelius replied that many people with gardens too small to hold functions in would benefit from the policy. I found this rather odd. Surely if people live in flats on low incomes, hiring out the park for a garden party is not high on their list of priorities.

Brian Coleman then piped up that "only 6% of the park will actually be hired out" and that people are spreading misinformation. Given that this 6% is the bit people use (you can't play football on the flowerbeds etc), I suspect that he's quite right to complain about misinformation.

Alan Scheiderman stated that it had been confirmed that the whole park could be shut. This had been confirmed at the Golders Green residents forum.

Brian Coleman piped up that the Council can already shut the park for 5 days a year for events. Schneiderman responded that Councillor Coleman clearly doesn't know the difference between community events and private parties.

Then we had Business planning. There has been a 26% cut in grants from government. Richard Cornelius was proud that 75% of these cuts had come from savings generated from reorganisation. Money was likely to be returned from Iceland. This would ease pressure on certain budgets, but he emphasised that this was a one off and that was a  relatively small amount in the pot.

Then we had Councillor Daniel Thomas. He stated that the Council Tax base had grown. This had eased pressure on budgets. He stated that Council tax would again be frozen. The year after it is set to rise by 2.5%, He talked of further savings of £29 million (unspecified) and said that the Council were bang on budget. He also talked of building up reserves of cash, with a view to future unexpected pressures. Those of us familiar with the way the Barnet Conservative group work, know what he means is that it is being stashed so that they can cut taxes before the next election in two years time. I would take the view that most people would rather have the cash now, when they are really struggling.

It was odd that later he talked about household finances creaking. Now one question I would loved to have asked. Surely if the One Barnet project was as marvellous as we are being lead to believe, then the cash should be freed up from reserves to help people now. It seems perverse that parking charges are being hiked, whilst the council stashes our cash away for "a rainy day". This is not Conservative policy. It is nanny knows best, state husbandry of our money.

Andrew Travers, who is responsible as area 51 officer (oh no, sorry area 51 is an area in Nevada where UFOlogists believe alien spaceships are kept) - financial officer - told us that he's satisfied that the cash is rolling in suitably well and the plans are robust. Mr Travers has a key fianncial role. He is not a council employee, he is a consultant, emplloying a front company to avoid paying tax. A practice that Eric Pickles has criticised. I first met Mr Travers under the reign of Mike Freer in 2009. Clearly the Barnet Council idea of a temporary role not quite what the Oxford dictionary implies. I think that local authorities should not employ people on such dodgy arrangements.

Andrew Harper started to ask a question. He was pleased to report that schools were considered important. At this point, the Council PA system started to scream loudly. Being a sound engineer, I wanted to go up and adjust it. The noise was quite painful. Eventually Harper stopped waffling, but I'd long since given up on his question.

Councillor Rams spoke about consultation. There are three strands. These are paper, online and face to face. Last year I organised a petition about Libraries. over 7,000 people signed it and it was included as part of the strategic library review. At the council meeting where the paper was adopted, I asked Rams for a commitment to keep me informed. He undertook to do this and I undertook to keep the people who signed the petition informed. Can you guess how many times Rams and Barnet have reported back to me? It is proof that Councillor Robert Rams sees consultation as a box to be ticked. He couldn't give a stuff about it.

Councillor Rajput (adult social services) made possibly the most boring and pointless interjection I've heard for a long time. He waffled on about the previous Labour government. Given that presumably the rest of the council cabinet agree with him, why did he bother. It merely irritated the audience (even those who agree with his policies). I would suggest to Rajput that if he wants to get on, he cuts out the drivel, the pointless rhetoric and the waffle. Stick to the facts and doing the job. Your colleagues don't want to listen to boring speeches and neither do the public. The point was eventually reached. Were equalities being taken seriously by the Council (see it could have been asked in five seconds).

Councillor Thomas replied that yes they were (strange that the Council keeps losing court cases because they aren't - maybe he was visiting area 51 with Travers when we were discussing that previously). It is so important that it was reflected in the corporate plan.

Councillor Cornelius then stated that equalities legislation was an unfortunate legacy of the last Labour government. Sadly I suspect dear old Richard doesn't really understand the issue. If he did, I doubt he'd have said that. As a volunteer for a disabled charity, who has spent a lot of time in a social setting discussing these problems with the people who are suffering, the equalities act has made a huge difference to peoples lives. Of course there are some times when it is misused, rather like the corporate regulation that allow staff such as Andrew Travers to masquarade as private companies to avoid tax. I wonder which costs the taxpayer more? Tax avoidance or treating the disabled fairly?

The we had Councillor Davey. His contribution to the debate "Debt repayment is at the forefront of my mind". He was worried about council rent arrears. Maybe he would wish to consider the cause of such debts. Council policies removing jobs from the Borough in botched outsourcing? Ever thought of that?

Then we had Councillor Helena Hart. She is concerned that Barnet will be shafted, when it gets responsibility for the Healthcare budget. Camden and Islington will get double what Barnet get. Wellbeing programs will be the first to suffer. Helena Hart seems to be one of the more sensible members of the cabinet. No waffle, no bluster. Councillor Cornelius agreed that this was a worry.

There was also the issue of receipts from business rates. This is going to be collected and kept locally. This is a good thing. Maybe then the council will actually care when they force businesses out of the High Street.

Councillor Rams asked if Councillor Thomas would like to congratulate the Mayor, Boris on his £3.50 a year cut to Council tax. Rather surprisingly, Councillor Thomas stated that this wouldn't even buy a half of shandy at his favourate lapdancing club and he'd rather the money was spent on providing proper care for the elderly. Gotcha, of course he didn't say that. I'm sure he's never been near a lapdancing club in his life, being a Welshman he abhors shandy and there's no way he'd rather Boris spent £3.50 a year of your money on caring for old people than giving you a pittance back. Of course he congratulated Boris.

Then on to the Library closure at Friern Barnet. Two Labour Councillors, Pauline Coakley-Webb and Barry Rawlings asked questions. Why was Finchley library in a Tory Ward being kept open until the Arts Depot replacement was ready, whilst Friern in a Labour ward was being sold off. We all know the answer, but there is no way Councillor Rams would say. It was all Pauline Coakley-Webbs fault for not winning the lottery and buying it for the community. At least I think that's what his answer was. It was clearly her fault. Rams stated that anyone could buy the building and carry on running it as a Library if they wished. Councillor Rawlings asked how the service could be transferred if there wasn't something opening elsewhere to replace it? He also asked for clarification on the figures as there was double counting of savings.

Councillor Rams clearly didn't understand the question. He responded that Garden Suburb residents had worked hard with their local Conservative Councillors to keep their library. I was sitting with a group of ladies from Friern. At this they started muttering obscenities about Rams. He really does have that effect on even the most genteel and fragrant of ladies.

And then Partnership Boards. Yet another Councillor Brian Coleman command performance. He stated that these boards were stuffed with unelected officials. He said that he regularly needed to remind them that he "had a democratic mandate" wheras they represented no one. Councillor Andrew Harper immediately struck to correct the impression Coleman was trying to paint. He stated that it was hugely beneficial to have the organisations represented and that public scrutiny of their work was positive. At this Brian Coleman bellowed  a sarcastic laugh. Harper looked affronted. Councillor Helena Hart had had enough of Coleman (haven't we all), she turned to him in a highly irritated manner and exclaimed "This is what democracy is all about". Coleman slunk back and picked his nose (as he always does when he's been told off).

And finally education> I've already mentioned Councillor Marshall and his annoyance at being kept waiting. He actually made a few rather interesting points.

1) Bishop Douglas School has limited appeal to local Catholics. I suspect that he hasn't chatted to the Head recently. The school has been making great strides. I have two children at Catholic schools in Barnet (just so readers know I have a view). Bishop Douglas has had a troubled few years. It is back on track. Many people who are not Catholics attend Catholic Schools. For instance, the owner of the Day of The Raj in Mill Hill, Romal is a Muslim and attended my old School, Finchley Catholic High. I am happy if the sector widens its appeal and inclusiveness. I am not sure what the point was.

2) QE Boys (one of Barnets leading schools in terms of results) attracts more pupils from Harrow than Barnet. This is shocking. It means that our roads are clogged with parents traversing the Borough from Harrow. It is a great argument against selective education and for a Comprehensive model. Councillor Marshall wondered if it meant that schools in Harrow were better suited to preparing their pupils for competetive exams. I wondered if it meant that the attitude of certain members of the cabinet to literacy and grammar was starting to be felt in the education service. I wondered if Councillor Rams gave a moments thought to whether his policy would help or hinder our young people compete with those from Harrow?

Footnote : I just got an email from a source at Barnet Council praising the conciseness of my blogs - ironic as I am posting the longest one for a year !




After questions, we had the

Brian Coleman attacks the people who elected Andrew Harper (from the Barnet Eye Spy)

The Tory Party in Barnet is full of comedians.Councillor Brian Coleman is a funny guy. Just ask Deputy Leader Andrew Harper. At tuesday nights council meeting, Coleman made a point of slagging off the Garden Suburb residents who elected Councillor Harper. Oh what fun Coleman had, as he read out and lampooned letters from residents concerned at the huge hike in parking charges.

The Brian Coleman fan club in the Barnet Torys merrily chortled along. Harper looked like he was about to have a heart attack, turning red and looking far from his normal amiable self. The more sensible Tories either looked disgusted or mortified. Perhaps the funniest facial expression was that of Councillor Helena Hart who looked like she had discovered a new place to store her red  hot poker.

Harper and Coleman have already exchanged emails on the subject. Coleman sort of suggested Harper lacked backbone. I suspect that Harper is worried he'll lack a council seat at the next election.

As it is, the Tories seem to be lining up to insult members of the public right now. Do they know something we don't? A certain very senior council officer made a very interesting observation about the meeting to me afterwards. I'd love to tell you exactly what was said, but then, you poor dears wouldn't have a Barnet Eye Spy anymore, would you. Oh happy days.......

(Ed Note : Thanks to the barnet eye spy for the report - notes dictated via phone. The Barnet Eye always welcomes reports from Council meetings, they can be emailed via the link in the sidebar)

An important question for every Barnet Citizen - Do you want a free dinner with Brian Coleman

As you know, the Barnet Eye is run by humourless lefties. As such we never, ever allow any whiff of humour into the blog and every single full stop is written in line with the principles of Leon Trotsky and Karl Marx. As such I'm sure you'll realise that there is no hint of irony whatsoever in this particular blog entry. As such, I thought I'd have a little competition and a little poll, which judging from the results of the Robert Rams poll, is likely to prove most popular. Anyway first the competition. For once this has a really fantastic prize. I am prepared to pay for dinner for the lucky winner, with the Barnet Tory of your choice at the restaurant of your choice in Mill Hill. The only condition is that the said Tory has to agree to come along with you. I will email them when the poll closes with full details of the offer. I'll pay for any starter, main course, side dish and pudding for both of you + the cost of one bottle of wine under £25. What an offer. Given that our local Tories are known to be partial to a nice free dinner, I'm sure they will be only too keen to participate. If they don't, feel free to give them a piece of your mind. Anyway what do you have to do to win? It's simple, you simply have to add a comment saying which Barnet Tory you'd like to spend the evening with, why you've chosen them and which fine Mill Hill restaurant you'd like to go to. Don't worry, I will keep well clear, so if you fancy a canoodle with Coleman over a curry or some rumpy with Ramsbottom over a roast, you won't have me around to spoil the party. So fire away.

Anyway, on to our poll. A local Tory said I'm always nasty and horrible about them. Here's proof that nothing could be further from the truth. Which other blogger has offered them such a fantastic chance. This is open to Councillors as well, so if Graham Old says "I'd like dinner at the Good Earth with Lynne Hillan, so I can Brown Nose her in the hope of a promotion", he might just win. I will be the sole arbitor and anyone who says "I'd like Dinner with Brian Coleman at the Chinese Medical clinic so they can stick acupuncture needles in his eyes" will be disqualified and if it's rude or contains anything illegal I'll delete it.

On to our poll. As the Barnet Eye editorial team contemplated this marvellous prize, we pondered the question of which Barnet Tory we'd least like to spend an evening having dinner with. Now after much deliberation we came to our decision, which we'll detail below, but we thought we'd give you the chance to vote from our selection. Anyway here's a few candidates and our bad dinner partner rating (10/10 means rubbish dinner companion, 0/10 means marvellous company). These are our candidates, for the poll

Councillor John Hart - 1/10 - Unlike most Barnet Tories, John can be quite funny (if you don't do PC). He also is rather fond of a tipple, so unlike most of them, you would probably get good value for money from John (especially if you are a leggy blonde).


Councillor Hugh Rayner - 2/10 - Hugh likes to think of himself as a racontour. He enjoys a tipple and likes a good joke (he must, he voted for Lynne Hillan in the Leadership contest).


Councillor Lynne Hillan - 3/10 - Now this rating may surprise you. The Barnet Eye has it on good authority that once the doors are closed, the curtains are drawn and the bottle of plonk has been opened, Lynne is by no means the stuffy haridan that some leftie bloggers like to portray her as.


Councillor Brian Coleman  - 5/10 - Now I bet you were thinking the Barnet Eye would put our Bwian as the last choice. Not a bit of it. We bear no grudge against Bwian, having taken him to the cleaners in our standards case, where he had to pay a huge legal bill. I can think of nothing better than spending an evening hearing how he ever thought he'd win.


Councillor Robert Rams - 8/10 - The man voted a twat by the Barnet Eye readers. Unlike his mentor, Brian Coleman, I can't really think of too many reasons why I'd want to spend an evening in his company. Certainly not his wit or his intellect. There is always the chance that if enough alcohol was poured down his neck, he might spill an indiscretion or two about Coleman, which would be good blogging material.

And the winner - The Tory Councillor which the Barnet Eye would least Like to spend and evening with is........

Councillor Graham Old - 10/10 - unlike the lot above, he really has no redeeming features whatsoever. He's the man who declared Kate Salinger as his hero, but let her be stripped of all her priveliges for her principled stand against the allowance rise. He has no backbone whatsoever and his support for Hillan in the 19/18 Leadership vote is the reason why Barnet Council still has Hillan at the Helm. A man who used the whole sorry debacle as a means to further his own career in the Barnet Tory Party. Whatever catastrophys befall Barnet Council from now on under Hillans awful leadership are the fault of this man, more than any, as he knew full well she had to go and he bottled it. I rang up my favourite Tory Councillor and asked if he could name a single redeeming feature of Graham Old. His response "erm, I'll have to think about that". He's still thinking.

Anyway, it's your turn now -vote away

Calling Barnet voters - Is this why you elected Tory Councillors?

Let's have a little discussion as to why any allowance or salary is set at a certain level. The whole idea is to attract the most suitable people for the job. If lots of people can do it and it's fairly mundane, salaries tend to be low. If it requires a high level of unique talent or it is a job not many people could do or would want to do, then it tends to have a high salary. Generally salaries are reassessed when organisations are looking for fresh talent. If they have had trouble attracting the right quality of people, then you up the salary. If there are a surplus of people who want to do the job, maybe you are paying too much.

Now the argument that the Tories in Barnet are using to justify the salary is, well "because they are worth it". Now if 18 months ago they'd said "We've had to put up with a completely useless idiot of a leader who lost £27.4 million in Icelandic banks (Mike Freer), another idiot of a deputy Leader who overspent £11 millon on a budget of £12 million at Aerodrome Road (Matthew Offord) and we've got a cabinet member for Social Services who has lead us on a disasterous policy of abolishing Sheltered Housing wardens which has lead us into a court case which we've lost (Lynne Hillan), they might have got some agreement from me. If they'd have said that the Barnet Tory Party was full of useless placemen and they were throwing the selection process for new councillors completely open to all with the promise of 100% pay rises if they won (as part of their manifesto) justified by the need to replace the likes of the failed team, I wouldn't have disagreed when they implemented the policy.  There would have been a justification and a popular mandate for change.

But the truth is that is the opposite of what they did. They hid the fact from the electorate that their first major action would be to award themselves huge pay rises. They didn't sack the failed old guard and try and recruit fresh blood. The only Tory councillors who were replaced were those who lost their seats, those who had legged it abroad, those who had fallen foul of the regime and been shafted and those who left to become MP's.  The replacements were specially selected lackies such as Barry Evangeli, who had dedicated his time to writing letters to the press saying that Brian Coleman is marvellous.

It is quite clear that there is a large surpless of Tory Councillors who would love to become cabinet members at the old rate of allowance. The Council Leader, Lynne Hillan fought like a polecat on heat to get the leadership, at the old rate. If she stepped down tomorrow, I know of at least three Councillors who would immediately snap up the job regardless of whether it was at the old rate or new. The whole grubby saga sums up the way allowances are paid in Barnet. They are not used to attract new talent, they are used to stifle competition and bludgeon Councillors into supporting the morally bankrupt policy of the leaders.

They used a three line whip on Councillors to ensure that they voted for the payrise and the one Councillor with the guts to say no, Kate Salinger was ritually humiliated in a public council meeting.

So if you voted Conservative in the elections in May tell me this. Did you vote Tory because you wanted an administration that behaves in this way? Do you think that it is acceptable for politicians to hush up a huge payrise until immediately after an election and then bludgeon it through, at the same meeting where they said everyone else would suffer from cuts.

In Mill Hill, where I live, we elected two new Tories to join John Hart. There names are Sury Khatri and Brian Schama. They've been councillors for nearly three months now and I only know of one thing they've done. They voted for this big payrise for their political bosses.  Do you know who your Tory Councillors are? Do you know of anything useful theyv'e done since being elected? Unless there name is Salinger, they voted for the rise. Is that why you voted for them (if you voted Tory)?

I received an email yesterday from the Hendon Times. They have reported that they've had an overwhelming response to their petition against the rise. If the Barnet Tories think this is going away any time soon, they can add deluded to their list of faults.

Barnet Tory Councillors fail the people who elected them

Lets talk Mill Hill first.

J'accuse Councillors John Hart, Brian Schama and Sury Khatri. The people of Mill Hill elected you to represent them. They expected you to cut waste in Barnet Council. Thats what your manifesto promised. Last night you voted for huge increases in allowances for your chums in the cabinet, some up to 100%. This at a time when public spending is being hammered. You have lost any moral authority you may have had. You have undermined any argument that may be made to the trades unions that cuts are needed.

In short you are a complete disgrace and should resign. Of course you wont. You get your bunce as well. I stood against you, for the Lib Dems, specifically to oopose this sort of disgusting troughing. I lost the election, but I believe you have committed fraud against the people of Mill Hill. Where in your manifesto did you say "We will give ourselves massive payrises". This is virtually the first act of the new administration. I was prepared to give you a chance to prove yourself. You are a disgrace.

As to Council Leader Lynne Hillan. She has shown herself completely unfit for the job. Doesn't she read the papers. The school rebuilding program in Barnet has been savagely cut by the new government, but she's all right jack. As to Brian Coleman - his allowances for a string of part time non jobs has risen to over £130,000 a year.

You may think you've won the battle for a pay rise, all you've won is round one. I will do everything I can to ensure you lose the war.

First Picture of New Barnet Conservative Council Cabinet

Group Photo of Barnet Conservative Council Cabinet

L-R Councillor Matthew Offord, Leader Lynne Hillan, Councillor Andrew Harper, Councillor Richard Cornelius, Councillor Melvin Cohen, Councillor Helena Hart, Councillor Daniel Thomas, Councillor Sachin Rajput, Councillor Robert Rams, Councillor Daniel Webb.

The new Cabinet would like to thank Mayor Brian Coleman for making the tea and bringing the biscuits whilst they celebrated their new jobs and would like to say sorry for not bothering to turn up on time to welcome him into the chamber aferwards at the last cabinet meeting.

Members of the public will be pleased to see the new busts of former council leaders Victor Lyon and Brian Salinger in the background.

Please note this picture is a spoof. Any likeness between any member of Barnet Council and totally wooden puppets on strings is purely coincidental