Barnet Local residents forum 29/11/2011 - Larches Trust Edgware

Last night, the Barnet Alliance for Public Services held a residents forum, for local people to air their grievances about life in Barnet. There were five main groups of people in a well attended meeting.

1. Local members of the public, inspired to come along by the policies of the local authority (Barnet Council). They were generally concerned about cuts to welfare for people who need support, cuts to budgets for youth services and parks and the insane parking policies of Barnet Council.

2. Members of the local Labour party. Councillor Alan Schneiderman, GLA Candidate Andrew Dismore and a bevvy of other activists.


3. Regular BAPS members, who are generally interested in Barnet politics, but as keen, if not more so to discuss the global issues of capitalism, finance and dodgy bankers.

4. A few interested onlookers, who said nothing, but occasionally clapped vigourously and nodded their head when points (parking, parks and welfare). This group seemed more interested in local issues than the discussions on the relative merits of the global financial system, but not being a mindreader, that is my take on their views.

5. The local Conservative Councillors and MP's.  Unlike previous meetings, they were represented at this meeting. In fact they were represented by a world famous figure, who has been represented in many books and movies. Yup, the invisible man turned up. Sadly he had nothing to say (sorry guys, couldn't resist the dig).

The first three groups of people all had a lot to say. The meeting was ably chaired by Alan Sloam, a former Barnet Councillor, who genuinely seemed to enjoy chairing a public meeting. I missed the first half of the meeting. I came in as Andrew Dismore gave a masterclass in dissection of the inept parking changes in Barnet. Whatever you think of Dismore, he certainly is a detail man. An issue such as parking is made for him. He won universal approval from the audience (after the meeting a couple of people told me they'd voted Tory in May, but would definately vote for Dismore to see the back of Coleman. People seem to know who is to blame for the parking fiasco.)

Another member of the Labour party spoke up for the policies of the previous government and explained how many people who had benefitted from schemes for young people in Barnet were suffering because of the policies of the council/government.

Councillor Schneiderman commented on the difficulty scrutinising One Barnet projects. He stated that the devil was in the detail and that the focus should be on individual service areas. He also commented that the parking changes could kill town centres (wide applause).

A BAPS member stated that the he was a member of the Coalition against the Cuts. He berated Labour for allowing cuts in Camden and other Labour Boroughs and stated that this was worse than Tory cuts. At this point, I reminded the audience that One Barnet was conceived long before the current crisis. The project started as Future Shape, shortly after Brian Coleman and Mike Freer arranged a palace coup and deposed Brian Salinger as leader, shortly after the May 2006 Council elections.

Julian Silverman, as vice chair, reminded the audience that the crisis was far wider than just Barnet. He explained that we needed root and branch reform of the financial services industry.

A local resident suggested that councillors should not chair Council run residents forums. The chair should be selected by the residents present.

Linda Evans, one of the local carers, discussed the hardships being caused by Council policies. She discussed the role of the CADDS organisation, which represents carers (and has been discussed on guest blogs by Janet Leifer here). She explained how CADDS had managed to reverse some seriously bad decisions. She detailed one, where a man who couldn't take himself to the toilet had his night care removed. She also discussed how Barnet Council has form for performing surveys of carers and then ignoring and burying the results.

Alan Sloam added that at a conference, a care worker in Barnet discussed the importance of parents with disabled parents putting in care plans for when they die. Apparently, despite there being a clear need, in Barnet at present only 7 out of 2,000 parent carers have lodged a care plan. This is due to rise to 12 by the end of the year.

Nagus Naren, subject of ridicule and abuse at a Hendon & District Residents forum earlier this year, for her Sri Lankan accent, from Councillor John Hart, who was the chair (and paid for the role), explained how Barnet Council has lost all credibility due to its toleration of such behaviour. She was visibly upset as she recounted the issue (This blog is disgusted that there are apologists for Hart who seem to think his behaviour was OK and that just because the committee delivered a perverse judgement, doesn't mean that it is all OK).

And with that, the meeting rapped up at 9.15. A motion was passed to deliver the minutes of the meeting to Barnet Council. I wonder what they will do with them?

There is something about all of this that does bother me. Again Conservative Councillors were invited. Again none bothered to come. Out of the 37 of them, surely there must be at least one who is eloquent,witty and able to handle a public meeting. That cannot be the issue. The issue must be that none of them agree with the policies that their council is implementing in relation to parking and One Barnet. I suspect that the only two councillors who think the parking fiasco is a good idea are Rams and Coleman. The rest are too scared. As for One Barnet, I don't think a single Barnet Conservative really has a clue what it is all about. Last night I was told of a very interesting conversation between Brian Coleman and someone present at the meeting regarding One Barnet. I'm sworn to secrecy, but lets just say that even the man who thinks the parking changes are a good idea has his reservations about One Barnet.

One thing I've learned over the years about people is that if something doesn't affect them, generally they don't care. They go with the flow. However, when they become the victims of injustice, they care passionately and for a very long time. Let me give you an example. At school, I received the cane so many times, I can't recall them all. Most of the time, I'd done something which transgressed the school rules and I accepted it. There were however three times when I got into serious trouble and I felt that I'd been treated unfairly by the school. To this day I remember these instances in minute detail and feel a sense of being wronged. That is why I believe we could have some interesting results in elections in the coming years.

Stuck in the Middle with You - A John Hart tour de force

Do you remember "Stuck in the Middle with you" the 1970's hit for Stealers Wheel. Watching John Hart and Sury Khatri chair the Hendon Residents Forum, I was reminded of this classic songs lyrics.

Well I don't know why I came here tonight,
I got the feeling that something ain't right,
I'm so scared in case I fall off my chair,
And I'm wondering how I'll get down the stairs,
Clowns to the left of me,
Jokers to the right, here I am,
Stuck in the middle with you.

Watching John and Sury chair the meeting, I started to wonder if I'd at some stage in my misspent youth been slipped a hugely powerful halucinagenic drug and I was really lying in the ward of a mental hospital imaging it all. I missed the first question. I entered the room during question 2. Hale Ward Councillor Hugh Rayner came up and asked me to make sure I read his press release justifying voting for huge rises for Tory Cabinet members. Sadly he didn't have one to actually give me, which meant I ended up sitting with the Labour troublemakers - Andrew Dismore and his merry men (as I know them and thought they'd give me a copy). I hadn't really intended sitting with them, but it meant that there was a little cabal of smart alec trouble makers all sitting together waiting to ambush poor old John and Sury. Question 2 was from local environmental champion Clive Cohen about topsoil. I hadn't anything to add.

Question 3 was from Mr Dan, who I don't know but I suspect is a disgruntled Burnt Oak Resident. It's points were many and vaired. John Hart asked told us to look at the table of figures and asked if we were happy. We were all nonplussed. He said "right if there are no questions, we'll move on to question 4". Sadly for John, Mr Dan then said "I've not even started". He read out a prepared statement which started "I've lived in Burnt Oak since 1940" or some such thing. The gist of it was the Tories were rubbish and he wasn't happy. John Hart tried again "Well if thats it". I then piped up saying that the council hadn't actually answered point "B" which is "what is the councils position of the £M's placed in Icelandic bank?" They had simply spewed out some waffle. John Hart tried to persuade us that the council had done a spiffing job, earning £25 million a year in interest and that they had to invest the money overnight. Andrew Dismore made a couple of relevent points, to which John Hart said "I don't do figures" and then "I wasn't in charge". He explained that you had to invest the money. I asked him if he was aware that the Council hadn't followed it's treasury management policy. His response was along the lines of "I don't do figures and I didn't invest the money". In short the "not my fault guv'nor" defence.

Cue question 4 from Andrew Dismore (ex MP).  John Hart objected to the fact that an ex politician was making political points at a residents forum. Mr Dismore pointed out that he was a mere resident and John Hart was the politician. Mr Dismore was trying to get a statement out of Mr Hart on the Allowancegate scandal. When he finished, I tried my luck. "Dear Mr Chairman, do you agree with the statement made by The Chairman of the Finchley Residents forum last night when he said that Councillor Kate Salinger was his hero". John replied (cunning linguist that he is) "Surely he said Heroine". I said he'd definately said hero and did John agree with this in light of her principled stand against the increase. John replied that Kate Salinger was indeed a very highly principled woman, unlike himself. I'm sure he added under his breath "I've got no principles at all", but I may have misheard him. At this I asked him if he'd got a rise for chairing the residents forum and he said "No and Sury actually got a pay cut".  I thought to myself "what sort of idiots have we elected in Mill Hill. They only support troughing by other people". It would be bad enough if it was for them, but all that derision so the likes of Brian Coleman can have an extra week on holiday in Dorset with his mum.

When it was clear that we would get no joy, we moved on to part two of Mr Dismores  question. What did John Hart think of the cancellation of the school building program, which condemned pupils at Copthall and St Marys to study in slum like squalor. Mr Hart said it was necessary as Andrew Dismore had spunked all the money. I asked how Mr Hart as a former polytechnic lecturer and Mr Khatri as a nuclear scientist could justify the cuts. He replied that it was vital to fix the mess that Andrew Dismore left. Andrew Dismore then explained that this was not the case at all. Given that it is the children of Hendon who suffer, it made me feel rather sick.

At  this point I started to hallucinate that John and Sury were really members of Stealers Wheel.  The middle eight came to mind

Well you started out with nothing,
And you're proud that you're a self made man,
And your friends, they all come crawlin,
Slap you on the back and say,
Please.... Please.....

We then moved on to West Hendon redevelopment. Same argument "Labour spunked the money" from Hart, from Dismore "Why have you done nothing for ten years". John Hart then the "Not my fault guv" defence, pointing out he'd only been on the council since 2006. Labour Councillor Julie Johnson interjected and made a couple of rather wise and non partisen comments about the problems with the scheme. my mind went back to election night. There was a time when the Labour candidates thought Julie may have lost. Thank god she didn't. It was a pleasure to see someone on top of their brief. Councillor Khatri made a little speech about the problems, but it was clear he knew nothing about the subject. I suggested he did his homework and finished the speech at the next meeting. He looked rather hurt.

The next question was from Nagus Narenthira again about Councillor pay rises. The Council had deployed some sophistry in their answer. We pointed this out several times but I suspect that John Hart was rather pleased as it got him off the hook. There was a bloke sitting next to Hugh Rayner who I think is a Tory Councillor (I don't know his name). At this point he said "what does it matter". Well it rather matters a lot that the council get things right, follow the rules and don't make mistakes.

The reason for the Icelandic fiasco, the Aerodrome road overspend, Partingdale Lane legal fiasco, Underhill Fiasco etc is just this. Lack of attention to detail. I asked what John Hart thought of the GMB's legal challenge to the allowance rise. His response "I used to be a trades unionist you know". He then said "good luck to them, it's their right in a democracy" or words to that effect.

The next question, at which point I made my exit was about shrubs in a playground. John Hart announced he was pleased to get back to "non political proper residents forum questions". I'll bet he was. I'll bet he was even more pleased to get home and have a nice glass of valpocella or the like. I don't think he really enjoyed the meeting. John Hart's idea of a good forum is one where he cracks a few jokes, gets a few hedges cut and is out by 8pm for a beer. Sadly the audience in Burnt Oak this evening were not in the mood for any of it.