The destruction of the London Borough of Barnet

The Tory response to the economic downturn

Last night, I had a vivid demonstration of the collapse of the infrastructure supporting families within the London Borough of Barnet. Let me explain. My son plays for Watling Youth FC. Every year at this time the club holds it's awards night. Last year the event was held at the Mill Hill Sports Club. The requirements for the venue is that it has to be able to hold 40-50 boys aged 7-12 and their parents/carers/ friends. Experience has taught us that it is better for all if we have the awards at a venue with an area outside for the boys to kick a ball around, whilst the parents have a drink and a chat. The Mill Hill Sports Club was idea, with it's large grounds and clubhouse.

Fast forward 12 months. This year, the venue is shut. The London Borough of Barnet has taken the site to house a new school. So where could we go? The only suitable venue we could find was in the London Borough of Harrow, at the Canon's Community Hall. The evening (as ever) was a fantastic success with all the parents and boys thoroughly enjoying themselves.

As I sat there I pondered the fact that a club such as Watling could not find a single suitable venue in the London Borough of Barnet. How ironic that the venue we used last year is being transformed into a school. It is a graphic demonstration of the destruction of the London Borough of Barnet by this administration. There is a chronic shortage of school places, so they have to rob land from community organisations, such as the Mill Hill Sports Club, to fill the gaps. What this means is that they can fulfill their legal obligation to educate children, but there is absolutely nothing for them to do outside school hours.

I may hear supporters of the administration saying "but there are no suitable sites in Barnet for the schools". This is (or was) complete nonsense. In Mill Hill these are three school sites which are currently being redeveloped as property developments, which were formerly school.

1) St Josephs College on Lawrence Street. This huge site was formerly owned by the Roman Catholic church and was used to train students as Catholic Priests. It is a huge site.

2) Holcombe House. This was also owned by the Roman Catholic Church and housed the Missionary Institute. It offered theological training and was used by people studying to degree and masters level.

3) Littleberries. This was the former site of St Vincents School, which moved over the road. The site used to house a single form entry primary school.

All of these sites are designated as educational establishments, but the London Borough of Barnet showed no interest in the sites. They all have access to extensive lands and are in beautiful locations. If developers get their way, they will exploit these locations to build prime real estate.

But we are getting two new schools. We are getting the Etz Chaim Free School in the former Daws Lane Garden Centre, which was originally Mill Hill Swimming pool and was given to the people of Mill Hill as a gift for the sole purpose of provision of recreational facilities for the general public. We also have the Mill Hill Sports Club development. Barnet have also sold off huge parcels of land around Fairway and Broadfields schools, which could have been used to accomodate growth.

The mayhem doesn't end there. We have the huge Mill Hill East development, currently going up. This is a small town and will have it's own school. Rather sadly, the two nearest pubs to the site. The Angel and Crown and the Mill have recently shut to be replaced by yet more developments. The Mill is a particular loss, given it's beautiful Garden, which was used by many families in summer months for a pleasant pint. Both pubs were also regularly used as venues as part of the Mill Hill Music Festival.

In all of this there is a pattern. Property developers identify non residential sites such as pubs, schools, etc which provide valuable community facilities. They know that if they can get the planning consent flipped from educational usage to residential, they will make a fortune. As the pattern repeats itself across the Borough, more families are housed and the requirement for more school places increases. As the educational sites have been redeveloped, the council has to look at it's portfolio of properties and as they place no social value whatsoever on recreational activities, they know these are soft targets for conversion into schools.

I tried to instigate a campaign against the loss of the Mill Hill Sports club, but no one wants to deprive children of an education. Local people bought the council line that it was "the only possible site". I have learned from bitter experience that a campaign that local people are not interested in, is a complete waste of time.

In recent days, this blog has been focussing its attention on the One Barnet project and the One Barnet project board. When I first heard the then Council Leader, Mike Freer MP describing the One Barnet program, I was quite excited. Mike explained that it would bring together all parts of Barnet, to ensure a co-ordinated approach to running the borough. He explained that the Police, NHS, educational authorities and business would be involved and the council would have a balanced strategy. Even more radically, Mike explained that he had paid for the Trades unions to engage a top expert, Dexter Whitfield to advise them on the project, so that they could add constructive input. The Barnet Unison rep, John Burgess was initially sceptical, but the fact Barnet Council had paid for him to have access to such a figure, made John feel that there may be the basis of a very constructive process. Mike explained at a business breakfast that One Barnet would not simply be a "big outsourcing project". It would encourage efficiency by cooperation, would deliver better services for less money and would include all strands of opinion in the formation of policies. He pointed to the appontment of Dexter Whitfield as proof of his good intent.

The whole process has unravelled. Dexter Whitfield delivered his taxpayer funded report. It damned the whole process and showed it to be ill thought out, badly managed and risky. Mike Freer reacted in the most stupid way possible. Rather than seek to address the weaknesses, Freer rejected the report out of hand and withdrew to his bunker. In my blog earlier this week, I commented that the lack of transparency of the One Barnet board meetings and the membership of the board was a threat to democracy. Not because of any reservation about the individual members, but because there is a board of people talking about reshaping the Borough, none of whom are elected representatives and none of whom have any democratic mandate for what they are doing.

We also have the issue of the people who aren't represented on the board. There are no representative from small business. There are no representatives from the charitable sector. There are no representatives from any sort of environmental groups. There are no representatives from any of Barnets ethnic or religious communities. Most of all there is on one who is a single, one parent family living in social housing and on benefits and a child who is in trouble with the police. You may thing "what a stupid statement, what could someone who is a a single, one parent family living in social housing and on benefits and a child who is in trouble with the police, possibly add to the conversation about the future of Barnet?" Well, if you think about it, such a person is the person who actually has first hand experience of all of the failings of all of the organisations on the list of board members (as of my FoI request in 2010). 


•    Tom Nathan, Commercial Director, Brent Cross Shopping Centre
•    Cameron Ward, Chief Executive, NHS Barnet
•    Stephen Knight, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Middlesex University
•    Neil Basu, Borough Police Commander
•    Marilyn Hawkins, Principal, Barnet College

Lets think this through. Of the One Barnet Board, our single parent would probably have the odd shopping trip to Brent Cross, but the fact they are on benefits either means that Brent Cross cannot offer cost effective employment, or it has destroyed local jobs in local shops which may provide a way out of the benefit culture.  Our single parent would presumably have experience of the NHS. Would their experiences be positive or negative. I'm lucky enough to have an excellent medical practice at the Millway surgery, who I have no issues with at all. I had different expereinces with Barnet Hospital and my mother when she was ill.

As to the people from Barnet College and Middlesex University. These are the best paths out of poverty and  benefits, but are people in such situations actually able to contemplate using such establishments. Are course structures accessable? I don't know and I doubt whether the people on the One Barnet board really know if the people they should be reaching see education in this light.

Then there is the Barnet police. I may be wrong or naive or even out of touch, but I wonder if the Borough Commander has ever considered popping in for a cup of tea with the mum of an young offender, to see what she thinks of the police in a private and non confrontational situation? I believe that one of the main victims of the Coalition cuts is some of the outreach work that the Met Police were doing. I believe this is false economy.

And then there is Nick Walkley. Does he ever nip around to visit the single mums of Barnet, to see what they think of the services his organisation provides?

The One Barnet board has been in existence for six years. What has it delivered? Has the strategic thinking improved in Barnet? Are we getting the big decisions right? Are we providing an environment where Barnet is becoming a better, safer and healthier place to bring up children? The answer for me was answered last night when I had to visit the London Borough of Harrow for mys sons football team to receive their awards.

The Barnet Alliance for Public Services  (BAPS) and Barnet UNISON have organised a conference to highlight the problems with the One Barnet Program. If you care about the future of the London Borough of Barnet, please come along

Barnet Council Not for Sale’ Conference 7 July 12—3pm - Saturday 7 July Barnet  Greek Cypriot Centre, Britannia Road, Britannia Road, North Finchley, London N12 9RU.

Nick Walkley and conflicting interests

This week I've heard some rather disturbing news. At this stage I cannot disclose the nature of this news, but it has caused me to question the way Barnet Council seems to be morphing into an organisation which is less interested in simply providing good services to local people and becoming something altogether more sinister.

Let me try and explain. The Chief Executive Officer of Barnet is Mr Nicholas Walkley. To do this job, he gets paid £200,000 + benefits. For this enormous sum of money, I happen to think Mr Walkley should be 100% focussed on making sure that the council runs properly and not have any other distractions. It is a big enough job on its own and surely he doesn't need any more cash?

Then I came across this document - http://www.mpa.gov.uk/downloads/partnerships/lcrb/110825.pdf  - this is an organisation called the London Crime Reduction Board. In the minutes, I found this paragraph 

Nick Walkley provided an outline  of the work of the Recovery Coordination Group (RCG),  a body set-up by representatives of the boroughs affected, London Councils, the GLA, the Metropolitan Police and the London Fire Brigade.   It is  a short-life group with terms of reference to help London get back on  its feet in the wake of the disturbances.  NW chairs the Group.

As I read further, I came across this paragraph

The RCG is leading work on an impact assessment, to assess how the disorder has affected victims, businesses and communities and what is being done in each local area.  NW said that at present the majority of businesses, many of whom are sole traders, are facing financial difficulties.

The date of the meeting was the 25th August. Now there is a very interesting thing to consider. Mr Walkley talks here about local businesses suffering from "financial difficulties". Do you know what he was planning to do at the same time as he was chairing this meeting? He was planning with Brian Coleman to abolish Pay and Display in Barnet's High Streets and replace it with Pay By Phone. He was also planning huge hikes in High Street charges. I wonder if the RCG discussed this when they met and discussed how to get London back on it's feet? I wonder if the conversation went like this

Mayor of London - Boris Johnson - "Well Nick, you are the leader of the RCG, what ideas have you got to help business and get London back on it's feet financially"

Nick Walkley -  "Well Bozzer, in Barnet we are planning to abolish pay and display parking, hike up parking charges and drive all the customers away from local businesses and into large shopping centres like Brent Cross, which we want to see double in size, they have to get their customers from somewhere you know"

Now this may seem outlandish, but back in 2010 I asked an FOI question about the "One Barnet Project Board" - a board set up by Barnet Council to integrate the One Barnet project and ensure smooth liaison between various major stakeholders in Barnet. Here is the details of the FoI response.

Non-Executive Directors of Barnet Council 

a) How many Non-Executive Directors does Barnet Council have?  

None in the usual sense of the term, but the executive heads of the five principal partner bodies advise the Council's Chief Executive and senior colleagues on an informal unpaid basis.  They are referred to as Non-Executive Directors (NEDs), although they have none of the usual responsibilities associated with this function.

 b) Who are they?  
•    Tom Nathan, Commercial Director, Brent Cross Shopping Centre
•    Cameron Ward, Chief Executive, NHS Barnet
•    Stephen Knight, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Middlesex University
•    Neil Basu, Borough Police Commander
•    Marilyn Hawkins, Principal, Barnet College
c) What organisations do they represent?

See above

d) What criteria does Barnet Council use to engage these Non-Executive Directors?

They are not "engaged" but have accepted invitations to meet with the CE and senior colleagues on an informal advisory basis, the only criterion being their posts as heads of the five principle partner bodies listed above.

e) How often do they meet?

Monthly

f)  What is the name of the Council Committee(s) in which they assemble? 

The CE of NHS Barnet attends Cabinet meetings in an advisory capacity.

g) How much are they paid to fulfil this Non-Executive Director role? 

Nothing 

 
h) What influence do they have on Council Policy? 

The Council has a role of civic leadership amongst the above partner organisations.  The NEDs informally advise the CE and his senior colleagues in fulfilling this role. 

i) How long has Barnet Council had Non-Executive Directors? 

Since 2006 

j) Do these non -executive Directors represent Barnet Council in any capacity on Committees outside the Borough? 

No 

k) Which Council Officer appoints them in their role as Non-Executive Directors? 

No appointment is made - they are invited to take part in this advisory process by the Chief Executive. 

l) What is their period of Office as a Non-Executive Director and how do they cease to
become a Non-Executive Director? 

The arrangement is purely informal.  No period of office is stipulated.  Their  position as NEDs is consequent on their appointment as heads of their respective organisations.

As you can see, the board contains the chief of police and the managing director of Brent Cross. They meet informally and so no minutes are taken. Who was the only private sector representative. Not someone from small business or a representative of small traders. No, it was the MD of Brent Cross. Now I've attended a presentation by Tom Nathan and he is a superb speaker. One has to say that in his role on the board, is he likely to favour measures which benefit his business or local traders?

Now this is bad enough, but lets consider another role of Mr Walkley. He is the returning officer at local elections in Barnet. It is his role to oversee elections and make sure they are conducted legally. His job is to resolve any breaches of election law and make sure they are dealt with appropriately. Let me give you a recent example. At the Brunswick Park by-election, the Conservatives put out a leaflet which made claims about car parking charges which technically breached election law. It is Mr Walkley's duty to investigate these and ensure that the Police do their job in prosecuting anybody seriously breaching the law. It is not unknown for private individuals, with an axe to grind to breach these laws on a local level. If someone has a beef with a local councillor or GLA rep, they may do something which breaches such laws, by putting up posters which contain minor breaches. Mr Walkley has to decide whether these should be acted upon. In most cases, a simple call explaining the law and a request to stop suffices. After all we live in a democracy and we don't want to persecute citizens, do we?

So consider this. Take the Brunswick Park leaflet. This was out by a professional political party, who should know the law. The election agent should have training in what should and shouldn't be put up. Mr Walkley, who is CEO on £200,000 is also returning officer and gets paid a few grand for this job as well. He does however report to the Leader of the Council, Richard Cornelius, who is leader of the Conservative Party group. If Mr Walkley chooses to prosecute the election agent of the Conservatives for the leaflet, how will this go down with his Conservative boss? Is this a conflict of interest?

Then lets consider the other side of the coin. We have the One Barnet project board, that meets with members of the Council, Police and Brent Cross. There are no minutes so we don't know what is discussed. At present Barnet is awash with protests about car parking charges. There isn't a single representative who has the local traders interests on the board, quite the opposite.

We theoretically could have a situation where Mr Walkley has found himself embarrassed by the parking protests, which reflect badly on him and his organisation. We have Brent Cross, which stand to financially benefit from the movement of trade from High Streets to the large shopping complex. All very cosy. We also have the Chief of Police sitting in on these convesations. Now I know Neil Basu and Neil Seabridge, who are the last two chiefs of police. I have no doubt that these two gentlemen are completely above board and would not be party to any underhand dealings. I do however have concerns about a structure that allows for the potential of conversations which may be prejudicial to certain groups and individuals withing Barnet.

Just suppose, for instance that a group opposing the parking changes found themselves on the wrong side of the law? How could anyone have any confidence whatsoever that the process hadn't been compromised by all of these conflicts of interest. We rely totally on the honest and integrity of the particular individuals to ensure that everything is above board. There are absolutely no checks and balances and no democratic accountability for this process. All of the people listed above are listed by the Council as "One Barnet Stakeholders". Someone such as me, who opposes One Barnet finds themselves not only in opposition to the policies of the Conservative administration, but up against the Police, the NHS, Middlesex University and Brent Cross shopping Centre.

Do you find this all a bit disturbing? I most certainly do. Barnet Council and Nick Walkley seem to have no concept of what a conflict of interest is. They have no concept of democratic accountability and transparency. That is why there are are no minutes for this meeting and we have no idea what they get up to.

The more power that gets concentrated in the hands of an unaccountable few, the more potential there is for abuse. How much of this is a real threat and how much of this is just potentially a threat? Sadly you only find that out that the process has actually been compromised when people who oppose projects like One Barnet start finding themselves on the end of police investigations for the most trivial of matters. Whilst we all hope that no such thing could happen in Barnet, shouldn't we insist that the structures and separation of responsibilities are in place to ensure that such things are impossible.

Breaking News : Brian Coleman to join Barnet Lib Dems

Barnet Lib Dem Leader this morning announced that Brian Coleman is to join the Liberal Democrat Party. The deal has been brokered by Nick Clegg and David Cameron, in an attempt to revitalise the coalition in Barnet. The existing Lib Dem candidate for the GLA elections has agreed to step aside to allow Mr Coleman a free run at the seat.

The Barnet Eye suggests that this is clearly a panic move, sparked by recent reports that Labour candidate Andrew Dismore is a shoe in for Barnet. Jack Cohen added "Although Brian and myself have had our run ins in the past, we are really the best of friends. Brian and his mum often pop in for tea and scones on their way to functions in London". The Barnet Eye rang Mr Coleman for a comment but got the phone slammed down on us. Conservative Leader Richard Cornelius said "I urge everyone in Barnet to support the Coalition candidate. This arrangement is great for Conservatives and great for our partners"

************* Updated 11.20 *****************
In a surprise announcement this morning, the local Barnet GMB branch announced that it is dumping Labour candidate Andrew Dismore and will be backing Lib Dem candidate Brian Coleman. Local branch sec Avi Newon said 'in the GMB we like to back winners'. In a seperate move, Coleman was seen in Brent Cross with Ceo Tom Nathan shopping for wooly jumpers and was heard to say 'i suppose i'll have to grow a beard'

The five most influential people in Barnet

If you live in the London Borough of Barnet, you may wonder who are the people who have most influence on your day to day lives. I'd be interested to hear your suggestions and why you think they "matter".  This list was compiled by the "Barnet Eye official panel" over a cup of tea in at the studio last night during a slack moment in business. This list is not a public endorsement of these people, just our best guess at who can most affect your life.

1. Nick Walkey - Barnet Council CEO - He's the man who makes the Council run. He believes that Leader Lynne Hillan is there to do his bidding and it seems to the Barnet Eye as if he's right. he is the guy who makes all the decisions and your Councillors simply rubber stamp them. Know to be partial to Punk Rock.

2. Tom Nathan - General Manager of Brent Cross and leader of Barnets biggest religious sect, The Shopaholics - Apart from Nick Walkley, has more effect on peoples lives than anyone else in Barnet. He runs the temple in which we all worship and is a Non executive director of Barnet Council for good measure. Thousands of people are employed by him and his empire is the largest taxpayer in Barnet, one way or another. As Brent Cross expands, he gets ever more powerful.

3. Neil Basu - Borough Commander of Barnet Police - He's the man who sets the policing policy and decides whether the bloke robbing your shed, or the bloke mugging your granny or guarding the mayors lawn is the top priority for his policemen. As the recession bites and unemployment rises, his decisions will become ever more critical. Competent, with a modern view of policing. The member of the Barnet Eye panel who is a Barnet Copper pointed out that he's also extremely keen on maintaining a well groomed, tidy appearance.

4. Brian Coleman - Barnet Council Cabinet member responsible for roads and chief of Londons fire brigade. This is the man who's decisions are most likely to end your life. He's also the power behind the throne (a Rasputin to Tsar Lynne Hillans). The most intelligent, motivated and driven of all Barnets leading Tories. Hates Trades Unions, bloggers. Probably the only Councillor feared by Council officials (if not respected).

5. John Burgess - Barnet Trades Union Convenor - workaholic, strident campaigner and the most effective opponent of the cuts and changes affecting Barnet Council. Understands the detail of changes such as future shape and the effects at ground level far better than anyone. Hugely respected across the board for his sensible, pragmatic and reasoned approach. If Barnet public sector workers ever go on strike, you can be guaranteed that it is because Barnet Council have been stupid, unreasonable and haven't thought things through properly.

The scandalous destruction of Barnets Town centres by Barnets Conservatives

I asked one of Barnets leading Conservative Councillors whether they supported the Federation of Small Business  manifesto for Barnet. As a small businessman who employs 9 people, I believe that this is the best way to reinvigorate the local economy. His response :-

I don’t think it would be appropriate for the Council to be supporting any particular lobby group’s manifesto. 

Fair enough you may say. It is not an unreasonable position to take. Whilst I had hoped for a more positive response to a sensible set of proposals, in the dull, unimaginative world of Barnet council, it is probably to be expected. I talk to many other small businessmen in Barnet. Many run shops in our High Streets. The story I am told time and time again is that they get no support from Barnet Council. When the Barnet Lib Dems proposed changes to parking fees, making the first hour free in Mill Hill Broadway, a move supported by all of the traders, the council refused point blank on cost grounds.

Parking wardens seem to approach CPZ ticketing with a military precision. If the CPZ starts at 11am, they pounce at 11am and get as many tickets in as possible, knowing some peoples watches are a couple of minutes slow. All of this pushes shoppers away from the High Streets, towards large shopping centres such as Brent Cross, where parking is free. It has long seemed to me that Brent Cross shopping centre and the large chains which inhabit it operate under a completely different set of rules to the rest of us. Whilst I understand the need for Barnet to encourage a thriving business, such as Brent Cross, this cannot be to the exclusion of small business and small shopkeepers. The question I've often wondered is "Does Brent Cross get special treatment from Barnet Council". Until yesterday I thought that this was unlikely. Now I'm not so sure. Let me share with you a response to an FOI which I was shown.
There are no such committees.  They meet informally with the CE, Deputy CEs and Assistant CE.
 

Non-Executive Directors of Barnet Council

a) How many Non-Executive Directors does Barnet Council have?  

None in the usual sense of the term, but the executive heads of the five principal partner bodies advise the Council's Chief Executive and senior colleagues on an informal unpaid basis.  They are referred to as Non-Executive Directors (NEDs), although they have none of the usual responsibilities associated with this function.

 b) Who are they?  
•    Tom Nathan, Commercial Director, Brent Cross Shopping Centre
•    Cameron Ward, Chief Executive, NHS Barnet
•    Stephen Knight, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Middlesex University
•    Neil Basu, Borough Police Commander
•    Marilyn Hawkins, Principal, Barnet College
c) What organisations do they represent?

See above

d) What criteria does Barnet Council use to engage these Non-Executive Directors?

They are not "engaged" but have accepted invitations to meet with the CE and senior colleagues on an informal advisory basis, the only criterion being their posts as heads of the five principle partner bodies listed above.

e) How often do they meet?

Monthly

f)  What is the name of the Council Committee(s) in which they assemble? 

The CE of NHS Barnet attends Cabinet meetings in an advisory capacity.

g) How much are they paid to fulfil this Non-Executive Director role?

Nothing

 
h) What influence do they have on Council Policy?

The Council has a role of civic leadership amongst the above partner organisations.  The NEDs informally advise the CE and his senior colleagues in fulfilling this role.

i) How long has Barnet Council had Non-Executive Directors?

Since 2006

j) Do these non -executive Directors represent Barnet Council in any capacity on Committees outside the Borough?

No

k) Which Council Officer appoints them in their role as Non-Executive Directors?

No appointment is made - they are invited to take part in this advisory process by the Chief Executive.

l) What is their period of Office as a Non-Executive Director and how do they cease to
become a Non-Executive Director?

The arrangement is purely informal.  No period of office is stipulated.  Their  position as NEDs is consequent on their appointment as heads of their respective organisations.

As you can see, one name sticks out. Mr Tom Nathan, Commercial director of Brent Cross shopping centre. All of the other NED's are members of public bodies. The sole commercial representative is Mr Tom Nathan, from Brent Cross. As you see, this job is the gift of the CEO of Barnet, Nick Walkley. Although unpaid, Mr Nathan gets unprecedented access to the chief executive. I attended a Leader Listens business breakfast with Mr Nathan last year. He was a fine speaker and I'm sure that in many ways he's an asset have in Barnet. It's just that I can't possibly agree that letting Mr Nathan have an executive position within Barnet Council is good or healthy. Just suppose the Lib Dem proposal to allow free parking comes up before Mr Nathan in his meeting. If local shopping centres get more trade, Brent Cross gets less. How will he use his influence with the CEO? I was rather concerned about the issue of democratic scrutiny of these NED's. I asked the Leader of the Lib Dems, Jack Cohen for a comment. He was shocked. He wasn't aware of this arrangement. So it seems there is an executive arm of senior management within Barnet Council which is completely outside of Democratic control.


The biggest, most fundamental change to take place in the London Borough of Barnet is the Brent Cross redevelopment. There are many Borough wide issues which this impacts. Barnet Council wheeled out the Leader of the Council to support the planning application. The only senior Tory to oppose it was the Mayor, Brian Coleman, who has since been marginalised.  Do you feel comfortable in the knowledge that someone as closely associated with Brent Cross and the redevelopment as Mr Nathan has a position of executive responsibility on Barnet Council, purely by way of his job?

This whole issue is a can of worms. Is it any wonder that Town Centre regeneration is bottom of the list of priorities for Barnet Council and its Tory overlords.

Oh, one last thing on the subject of Town Centres. Please sign the petition for one hours free parking in Mill Hill Broadway -
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/support-free-parking-in-mill-hill-broadway.html