The wheels are coming off the One Barnet juggernaut

One Barnet appears to be destroying the Barnet Conservative Party. On Saturday I made this statement in a blog

"Yesterday I emailed every Barnet Councillor and asked for them to comment on whether they thought due time had been given to allow proper scrutiny. As of last night, not a single Conservative Councillor had responded. I had not even received a read receipt. Today a strange thing happened. Several Barnet Tories emailed me using private accounts. All asked for complete confidentiality, which I respect. What they have said disturbs me. It appears as if the local party are putting intense pressure on Conservative Councillors to bury their heads in the sand. The emails all have a common theme. This is

a) They agree that the time is woefully inadequate
b) They have been discouraged from finding information out about the project
c) They have been assurred that everything will be alright
d) No evidence to back this claim up has been given and requests for such assurances have been slapped down.

Another common theme is that these councillors understand exactly how this will end. As far as they are concerned (given that they deplore both One Barnet and the Labour Party). It will end with both One Barnet contractors and the Labour Party running Barnet. When they lost the Branswick Park by-election they realised that they may have a problem. The recent press coverage of One Barnet has made them realise that their time may well be numbered, save a miracle. Every failure, every problem a Barnet resident has once One Barnet has been implemented will be a bad news story and lost votes for the Conservatives in 2014. "

I was not too surprised as  I often get emails from Conservative councillors giving me interesting snippets of information, if they want something to get into the public domain, but don't want to get blamed, it is a useful way of getting the information into the open. What flabbergasted me was the fact that yesterday ex Tory Councillor Brian Coleman went public with the full sordid details of just how bad things have got. The Hendon Times reports here on what Mr Coleman had to say

http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/topstories/10070401.Coleman_labels_One_Barnet_scheme__nuts_/

The pressure was revealed to be

By this time the leader's blood pressure was rising until he finally jumped up "red in the face" and said unless the Conservative Group supported this, all the libraries would have to be closed and social services would be reduced to a crisis-only mode.

Another sign of the cracks was a couple of tweets today by Mike Freer MP, seeking to distance himself from his One Barnet baby. Could it be that Council Leader Richard Cornelius has found himself up a well known creek, asking his friends for a paddle.

Mike Freer MP ‏@mikefreermp

Meeting with the Chief Executive of the Council this morning, many routine items plus One Barnet update. #fb

Mike Freer MP ‏@mikefreermp

@_MrMustard as i haven't been Leader of the Council for nearly 3 years, he will be briefing me. #nobackseatdriver

All rather odd, isn't it

Barnet Eye Special - Coppers with Choppers !

The theme for today is policing in Barnet. I try not to criticise the police too much, because they have a tough job. Last year I had a chat with the chief of police and he agreed that Barnet was probably the safest and most pleasant Borough to be in charge of. That doesn't mean that it doesn't have its challenges and issues. In fact Barnet has challenges because it is probably the most economically diverse Borough in the country. The issues for policing the leafy mansions of Totteridge, where gated mansions and private security firms aim to deter burlgars are completely different to issues facing those living in Grahame Park. I was having a chat with a less esteemed member of the constabulary over a pint and he said a very interesting thing. If a millionaire in Totteridge gets burgled and his house gets ransacked, he expects the chief of police to personally conduct the investigation. If a single mum in Grahame park gets burgled and her house gets ransacked, often she's amazed if anyone actually shows up. Even more interesting was his view that criminality pervades every level of society, it's just that those at the bottom of the pile are not as proficient at it and get caught.

He made the point that the crack addict who robs his local off license has a high chance of getting caught sooner or later and will probably end up in prison. The company director engaging in corporate fraud will most likely never get caught. It isn't just such financial crimes where the expectation of justice is so different. When it comes to issues of spousal abuse and wider sexual crimes, this isn't just the domain of the poor in the borough. The difference is that women in the higher levels of society also feel "shamed" and so are less likely to report. The likely remedy is likely to be financial in the form of a divorce settlement or some cash to "shut up and go away".

Then there is the issue of drugs. Is substance abuse less or more common in the towers of Totteridge or the crack dens of Colindale? As a percentage of the population, it is probably pretty similar. Again, there is probably a disconnect between what justice one could expect if caught. A working class person caught with drugs, will probably just accept the punishment, whatever that may be. For the more well heeled members of society, a bevvy of lawyers and implausable excuses will be deployed. The more well heeled, the more it costs the police to persue even the most trivial of issue.

We have a bit of a schizophrenic attitude to the police. Half the time (when we get a speeding ticket) we moan that "they haven't got anything better to do, but if a speeding driver runs over our child we say "why don't they do something". I discussed the seeming obsession with traffic offenses with the police and they pointed out that you are far more likely to get injured or killed by a speeding driver than be murdered or maimed by a maniac.

We all feel safer when we see bobbies on the beat. They add a general feeling of security to us. Last night, as I played football at Powerleague in Pursley Road, we had a Police helicopter hovering nearby for about 10 minutes. I've no idea what they were up to, maybe monitoring traffic on the M1 or A1 after and incident? To me Coppers in choppers always make me feel a tad uneasy. When I watch Police, Camera, Action ! type documentaries and they show helicopters stalking villains with night vision, it reminds me that the big brother society is moving ever closer. Helicopters are expensive toys, which I've never been entirely convinced deliver value for money.

One of my friends who is a policeman (with old school attitudes to crime) tells me that the big problem is not the police at all. It is the fact that criminals are not locked up quickly enough, for long enough or regularly enough. He tells me that in Barnet, most burglaries are caused by no more than a dozen people. To lock each one up costs a fortune and then they are released, with the police knowing full well that there will be a spike in burglary cases, almost immediately. Of all the crimes, burglary is the one which people feel the justice system is most out of kilter on (with the exception of paedophiles). The police tell me they take the issue seriously and can, with justification, claim that it is not their fault if the courts don't lock people up for long enough.

Last year we had the sad spectacle of a murder in a brothel in Burnt Oak. For many Barnet residents, this seemed like a window to another world. I doubt that many of our local politicans have ever ventured out into Burnt Oak for a night out. The delights of a  pint at the Bald Faced Stag on a Saturday night is a pleasure I cannot imagine Brian Coleman savouring. Sadly it is something I believe all of our politicians should do. Last year on the campaign trail in Mill Hill, I had a friendly chat with Tory Councillor John Hart. The subject of Burnt Oak and his colleagues came up. It may surprise you to hear me say it, but I think John is one of the very few Tories who recognise the value of Burnt Oak and its citizens. John told me he always buys his fruit and veg in Burnt Oak. He told me that the Tories should be courting the small traders who run the shops, the hard working Asian community and everyone else working to earn a crust. He told me that if Matthew Offord won in Hendon, it would be because he'd got out and about in Burnt Oak (at Johns suggestion apparently) and that the 2-300 votes he'd gained as a result of talking to people there may be the difference. As it turned out, Offord won by 106 votes. John was right and it "woz Burnt Oak which won it for Souperman".

It is interesting that in the midst of the riots last year, unlike many working class areas, Burnt Oak didn't see large scale rioting. I suspect that this is because there is a sense of community there. I believe that this is a lesson for the Metropolitan Police in all of this. It is easy to retreat to our bunkers when cash is tight. There is a tendency to return to the squad cars and the choppers to police the Borough. This would be a mistake. I believe that the opposite should be the policy. More engagement with the community and more efforts to get people to work with the police. As Matthew Offord won his seat in Burnt Oak, I'd like to see him start to champion the area and put himself at the forefront of efforts to build bridges between the community and the police. There is no easy solution to keeping Barnet safe. The most important thing is for the Police to ensure that ALL SECTIONS of society see the Police as part of the solution and not part of the problem. Last year I was talking to another friend who is a Met Police officer. We were discussing drug dealers. She said that she'd had to go and tell the mother of a 19 year old drug dealer that he'd been murdered. The mother was devastated, she felt it was her own fault for letting her son ever get involved in gangs and drugs. She said she wished she'd turned him in to the police, the first time she'd found him with drugs. Would you? Would I?


I hope to god it's a decision I never have to make and I never have to regret.

District Auditor is "monitoring" Barnet Council's response to Metpro Scandal

A small victory for Andrew Dismore in his fight to get the district auditor to investigate Barnet Council and how it has handled the Metpro Scandal. Following Mr Dismore's interventions, the district auditor is monitoring the response of Barnet Council. They state that they need to "be assurred that the council has carried out the actions it has committed to". They aslo state "As noted in our previous letter, if there are issues with progress, the robustness of the work or the extent of further problems identified from the councils review then we will carry our further investigations of our own and consdider the use of our statutory reporting powers, as required. We do not hesitate to assure you that we will exercise those powers if we deem it in the public interest to do. The findings of the the internal audit review and the robustness of management action to address any significant weaknesses will be pivotal to our decision".

I suppose it goes without saying that the bloggers of Barnet will ensure that they are held to this commitment. Here is the letter in full - click on image for a more readable version. Congratulations to Andrew Dismore for his efforts. An interesting contrast with the response of his rival for the GLA - Brian Coleman, who has said nothing about Metpro. The role of the GLA is to represent us and take an interest in important local issues. What do we conclude from the Colemans silence?

The Daily Express names and shames Barnet Councils "Greedy Pen Pushers"

Cut these greedy pen pushers and free the nation !

This is the call to arms from columnist Leo McKinstry in todays Daily Express. Given that this blog has been calling for such action for years, we wholeheartedly back Mr McInistrys comments. Reading through Mr McInistrys article I was not surprised to find that the very first example he chose to give of council wastage was Barnet. In Barnet Council there is a culture of waste and a culture of not caring. Front line services are cut left, right and centre, such as wardens for the residents of sheltered housing,  call centres are moved to far flung shores under "Future Shape", in the process destroying local jobs, yet the council wastes millions on consultants to advise that there is a shortage of senior management. As the monstrous Future Shape "savings scheme" rolls into town we find that they are recruiting "senior assistant directors" on huge salaries to implement it (odd how in Barnet Council, savings always involve more managers). This blog detailed all of this a couple of weeks ago. Leo McInstry clearly agrees, he says in todays Daily Express :-

Too much public sector recruitment is nothing more than an employment racket for over-paid bureaucrats. Only this month, for instance, Barnet Council in North London has advertised for three assistant directors on salaries totalling over £300,000

We couldn't agree more, or put it better ourselves. Barnet Council CEO Nick Walkley and Leader of the Council Lynne Hillan should hang their heads in shame. The Daily Express is a staunchly Conservative paper and for a Tory Council to be named and shamed by such a paper is a complete humiliation. What we need is a council which takes an axe to the bloated management structure and uses the huge savings it can make to ensure that front line services to the weak, frail and elderly are defended.This blog is not a right wing slash and burn rag. We are left leaning and passionately believe in maintaining public services. This can only be done by efficiently managing our resources and getting rid of highly paid managers doing non jobs. Given the millions Barnet has spent on consultants, only to be told "hire more managers" it is clear that the bosses in their North London Business Park Ivory Towers just don't get it. I hope being named and shamed by the Daily Express is the reality check they need.

I have this question for Mr Walkley and Ms Hillan as they have their morning coffee. How do you feel about the fact that out of all of the hundreds of councils in England, the Daily Express chooses Barnet Council as the very first example of "an employment racket for over-paid bureaucrats" in an article titled "Cut these greedy pen pushers and free the nation"?

P.S Note to Boris. Your hand picked appointee to run the Fire Service (LFEPA) is the kingmaker who pulls the strings in this failed regime. Wake up and sack him.

Is Barnet becoming a Police state?

I was stunned to read the latest press release from Barnet Council. It is entitled :-

Enjoy the World Cup responsibly this summer

(click here to read the whole thing - http://www.barnet.gov.uk/press_releases.htm?id=2224 )

The press release ends with the following statement :-

Councillor Joanna Tambourides, Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Cohesion, said: "The World Cup is a time when the whole community enjoys the feelgood factor, and the council is totally supportive of residents enjoying themselves while watching the football. What won't be tolerated is anti-social and violent behaviour that intimidates or harms others simply trying to enjoy the games. We will work closely with our police colleagues to make sure that any problems are quelled quickly and effectively."

Does the phrase "We will work closely with our police colleagues to make sure that any problems are quelled quickly and effectively" sound like what you'd expect a councillor to say about the World cup? It surprised me to see that this is, so far, the only Barnet Council press release on the subject of the World Cup. Nothing trying to capitalise on the huge interest in participent sport, which will doubtless ensue. Nothing to get youngsters off their backsides and out  into the parks playing football. No special events to use the World Cup to promote community cohesion (just think how many different nationalities, who live in Barnet are represented). All we have from  the Police is this statement :-

Inspector Simon Roberts, in charge of Barnet Police's Priority Intervention Team, said: "Naturally we want England to go the whole way and win, and we want people to enjoy every moment of it. While we think the chance of any real problems arising is low, passions do tend to run quite high in these sorts of events. We will deal robustly with any disorder and alcohol related offences during South Africa 2010."

Is it just me or are we becoming rather authoritarian in Barnet. Are the Police saying they don't normally deal robustly with disorder and alcohol related offence? Are they saying that they are simply targetting World Cup revellers?

Even more worrying is the following statement in the press release :-

Enforcement and police officers have extra powers in the Cricklewood, Tally Ho, Finchley Central and Hendon Central areas where there are alcohol control zones now in place. If there are people drinking in the street and officers suspect they may commit anti-social behaviour they can demand the alcohol is handed over. A £500 fine is the maximum penalty for refusal.

So the Police have been given the power to sieze alcohol if they think someone "may commit anti-social behaviour". Lets get this right, you don't actually have to do anything. So if I go for a picnic in Finchley and have a lager and a policeman decides "I might commit anti social behaviour" he can nick my booze?

This is completely bonkers. There are acts of anti social behaviour actually happening all of the time in Barnet, which go unpunished, which the police totally ignore, but they can nick the booze of anyone they think "may commit an offence during the world cup?".

It flies in the face of English law to allow Police to punish people for crimes they haven't committed. They have drafted 30 extra officers in to deal with "football related trouble" but refuse to deal with all sorts of other trouble. Sure, bunches of bare chested blokes drinking lager and shouting "England" isn't the most edifying of sights, but what sort of a world are we coming to.

I suspect that the real cause of this press release is the fact that Councillor Joanna Tambourides and her ilk are snobs who hate football. I suspect that they consider normal working people who actually know how to enjoy themselves to be oiks and that they would ban all revelling if they possibly could. I seem to recall Brian Coleman telling Ken Livingstone with great glee, how he'd scuppered plans for a large screen for people to watch games on in Hyde Park. I suspect the reason that Brian doesn't understand the thrill of watching football over a few lagers with your mates is because he hasn't actually got any mates.

Londons Brave firemen Vs Londons Biggest Embarassment AKA Brian Coleman

Some clips really do need no comment at all.

Class A hypocrisy from Brian Coleman

I could not believe my ears. I was lying in bed, listening to the Vanessa Feltz show and who pops up to say what a marvellous job Barnet Council are doing? None other than our ubiquitous Mayor Brian Coleman. In the course of the broadcast he made a statement that made me spill my tea. Asked why schools in Barnet were shut, he said that it was due to the problems of staff getting in. No problem there. He then said that pupils generally lived close to the schools and that they could walk in. Again no problem there. Then he said "I'd much rather pupils walked in every day than have their mothers drive them in, in their 4 X 4 cars". Hang on. This is Brian Coleman. This is the man who has spent more public money on taxis than the rest of the GLA put together. This is Brian Coleman who used the Mayor Limo to pick him up from a standards hearing into a complaint against his behaviour. This is Brian Coleman who has the mantra of putting the motorist first in Barnet. This is Brian Coleman who ripped out all of the traffic calming measures designed to slow down cars on roads used by children walking to school. My daughter walks to school every day at Mill Hill County High School. All of her friends who walk from the direction of Poets Corner have to traverse roads with no safe crossings such as Lawrence Street. They have to walk up Uphill road, where Barnet Council removed road humps, even though all but three residents opposed this.

Every child should have a "safe corridor" to walk to school. A route where they do not have to chance their luck with dangerous traffic. Brian Coleman was road safety supremo in Barnet for many years. His policies were the exact opposite of a sensible policy required to get children "out of the 4X4's". Given that Barnet Council has completely neglected to grit sidewalks and sideroads, I'd say that the mums are quite justified in buying 4X4's as these are the only cars it is safe to drive your kids in when it snows.

Brian Coleman then said that anyone having problems caused by extreme weather in Barnet should email him directly via the Council website. Here's a link to his web page if you want to - http://committeepapers.barnet.gov.uk/democracy/council/councillor.asp?intsectionid=9&councillorid=6030 - I just hope he's more polite if you email him than he was to me.

Brian Coleman gets more money from the public purse than any other GLA member or any other Barnet Councillor. Well over £100,000 at last count, for a few part time jobs.  I'd suggest that if you have any problems, he's your man.

More common sense from Tory Councillor Brian Gordon

An interesting comment from Councillor Brian Gordon in the Hendon Times this week

Councillors should concentrate on what they are elected to do, rather than jump on personality bandwagons that will lead nowhere -Cllr Brian Gordon, Conservative, Hale Ward, Barnet Council

I can think of no wiser comment from any Barnet Councillor on any party in recent times. I sincerely hope that Brian Coleman reads this and gives it some serious thought.

I'm resigning from the Labour Party

I've had enough. I've been a Labour Party member for over 20 years, but I've had enough. Why? It's a culmination of many things. The last straw was a couple of weeks ago. I was at the gym and I was on a cycling machine. At my gym, we have large TV screens which show various channels. On one of these was SKY NEWS. The top story was the closure of a refugee camp nearl Calais. French Riot police, who looked for all the world like latter day stormtroopers were removing the refugees, bulldozers were tearing down the shanty town. They showed the faces of terrified young men, women and children as they were lead away. I thought to myself "This is no civilised way to treat such disenfranchised people". I hate bullying and this was state sponsored political bullying at it's worst. I thought to myself "I'm glad we don't behave like that". As I thought that, Alan Johnson, a LABOUR cabinet minister and seen by many as the heir to Tony Blair came on. What did he have to say? he said he was delighted by the actions.At that moment, I realised that myself and Labour no longer believe in the same things. I know refugees are not popular in some quarters, but most of this lot came from Afghanistan, a place where we are fighting a war. If we are going to engage in military campaigns in far away places, it is inevitable that we'll face issues such as these. If I was an Afghan living in Helmand and I didn't want to be a fundamentalist Taliban Muslim, and I saw the British army in my town, I'd probably decide to come here as well. I'd probably want my wife and children to live in a peaceful tolerant country rather than a warzone. Alan Johnson's comments show a total lack of compassion and understanding. This is not what the Labour party should stand for.

Let me make a couple of points. I hold local Labour Councillors such as Alison Moore in high esteem for the work they do. I doubt that you could get a cigarette paper between her and my views on just about any important social matter, but the people such as Johnson and Mandleson at national level just don't believe in what I believe or stand for what I stand for. When a Labour business secretary such as Mandleson proposes privatising the Royal Mail, how can someone like me associate themselves with that. I believe in progressive left wing politics, I totally support Ken Livingstone's progressive alliance, but I'm sorry I cannot support a party where senior people condone such actions.

This has been a very difficult issue for me as we desperately need to get the Tories out of Barnet Council. Labour will quite clearly be a part of that process. I believe that they will only achieve this by distancing themselves from national policies. Don't get me wrong, I will still strongly support all Labour candidates who believe in what I consider to be core socialist values. I just find that there are too many things which I fundamentally disagree with to classify myself as a "Labour member". I hope that the party will realise it's mistakes and when that happens I'll rejoin.

As to the tone of this blog. It won't change. I'll still urge people to vote Labour in Hendon at the next election. Andrew Dismore is a good MP (albiet one who I have had disagreements with). His opponent, Matthew Offord is a man who left a trail of disaster in his wake when he was Deputy Leader. He may do a fine widow twanky impersonation of Brian Coleman, which is really rather funny, he may write a nice blog about sailing, which is interesting and informative, but he is useless at being a politician and would be a liability. As to locally in Mill Hill. We have two Lib-Dems and one Tory John Hart. I like John Hart, I'd say he's the best of the bunch for Barnet Tories, but he's followed the party line so I'm afraid he has to go. As such I'll be supporting the Lib Dems in Mill Hill. On the wider Barnet scene, I'd urge people to do the following. I cannot believe that real local Tories can be happy with Mike Freer and Brian Coleman. I'd urge them to stand as independent Conservatives in seats such as Totteridge where the opposition stand no chance. I'd actively campaign for any  independent who stood for honest, transparent administration on this blog and give them whatever platform I could. I doubt the Tories will lose in Barnet next time, due to the national scene,  but I intend to try and help some sort of cross party effort to clean up Barnet and make it a Borough to be proud of.

I hope that Labour, Lib-Dem and Independent Conservatives can unite to solve our systemic problems. We may disagree on much, but lets get the administration into the open. Lets support the following :-

* Recording of all open Council meetings
* Only hold meetings in private when 80% of Councillors agree
* Bring back management by committees of councillors and scale back the powers of the Cabinet
* Put all expenses, gifts & hospitality and other relevent information on line (as has been done for the GLA)
* Change the Council Constitution so that the Mayor requires 75% of Councillors to elect them
* Reform the Standards process to weed out malicious or frivalous complaints, but to take real action against Councillors who can't behave themselves. Allow complainants the right to address the committee in Standards hearings.
* Put all council invoices over £2,000 on line to ensure best value for the people of Barnet

This has been a very difficult decision for me to make. It is in no way a reflection on any Labour member or councillor in Barnet. I must emphasise that Labour's Barnet Councillors have done absolutely nothing which I could criticise during the tenure of this blog. I just can't belong to a party which has the current mob at the top any longer. Sorry.

Brian Coleman's crass attitude to Paedophile Pornogrophy

This clipping is taken from an article in todays Ham and High. The Mayor of Barnet, Brian Coleman was talking about political bloggers. The article was a follow up of the Standards case where he was found guilty of breaching the London Borough of Barnet's code of conduct.

So Brian Coleman believes that people like me, who write blogs about politics should be regulated in the same way as Paedophiles. Let's think this through. What are bloggers? They are members of the public who use a service such as this to share their views on topics of their  choice with the general public. That may be football, music, sport or politics. Now on my blog, I talk about local politics. There's nothing said on my blog that you won't hear in pubs, dining rooms, on the bus or on the tube, as people talk about local politics. We live in a free society where if I want to say "Brian Coleman is doing a lousy job" I can. It's not like China or Nazi Germany where you get imprisoned, beaten up or murdered for criticising "Public figures". All this blog does is say these things to a wider audience. It's called Free Speech. I'd suggest that if Brian Coleman doesn't like it, he's not a very good Tory.

Let's compare this perfectly legal activity which has formed part of our national culture, with Internet Child Porn, as Brian Coleman seems to think they are equally serious issues. Unlike people discussing Barnet Council, people abusing children is illegal. To give you an example of how most parents feel about the issue, let me share a little story with you. 8 years ago my best friend and former business partner was in the death throws of pancreatic cancer. He'd had his leg amputated and was a couple of days away from death.He asked me to visit and said he wanted to discuss an important issue. When I entered the room, I could see he was in agony. I asked if everything was OK. He replied "Rog, I've stopped the morphine as there's something I needed to discuss and I wanted to be completely with it". He went on to explain that he was worried that when he died, his wife and children may be targeted by predatory paedophiles, who befriend single mothers to get to their children. He explained that he wanted me to keep an eye on them and if anything untoward ever happened to notify his brothers, who would deal with it as a family matter. He didn't care about the pain, just his kids.

Brian Coleman states that bloggers should be regulated in the same way as internet child abusers,
for what? for saying "Brian Coleman spends too much public money on taxi's"?

I would never, ever trivialise the issue of child pornography. It as a wicked evil in our society. I cannot believe that a senior Conservative politician such as Brian Coleman can think it is on a par with someone saying "Brian Coleman is a Lousy mayor". Of all the blogs I've written about Brian Coleman, the one he finds the most objectionable, the one he finds most beyond the pale and the one he (Mis)quotes in the Ham & High is this one (CLICK HERE it isn't rude). I consider it to be a rather frivelous and mild bit of political lampoonary, on a par with much of what Simon Hoggart may write in his Guardian Diary. Brian Coleman clearly considers that it is on a par with Child Abuse, based on his comment. He either takes himself far, far too seriously or alternatively he has no concept of how vile the man in the street finds kiddie porn. Either way his statement is in shocking bad taste. Yet again, he shows himself to be completely out of touch with the concerns of the average family in Barnet.

I have this question for Brian Coleman. Does he think that Policemen should be pulled off Child Abuse cases to arrest bloggers for saying he's useless at his job? If he does, then he's worse than we all thought. If he doesn't, then he should issue a public apology for belittling the victims of such a terrible crime.

Brian Gordon saves Mill Hill from hordes of sex crazed perverts !!!!

Barnet's very own caped crusader Brian Gordon has won a famous victory for the the right thinking people. He was very worried that posters promoting pills to cure erectile dysfunction would transform the citizens of the Borough into sex made perverts. He said :-

"There should be an understanding that certain things are indecent. This poster, talking about longer lasting sex in such a prominent way, vulgarises and cheapens something that should be seen as sacred. There is no question that such a poster can pervert the minds of many right-thinking people, including particular children, who are very impressionable." 

The Hendon Times reports that he's won the battle and we can all sleep soundly (not much chance of any other action now) in our beds at night. I agree with Councillor Gordon that these posters are not suitable for public sites, where children may see them. Whilst I thoroughly agree with Councillor Gordon about the undesirability of these posters being seen by children, he certainly seems to have widened the issue considerably.

I'm rather interested by his comments that the poster cheapens something which should be seen as sacred. I am wondering if this announcement signals a shift in policys of Barnet Council towards a more puritanical stance on sex and personal relations. I wonder if Mike Freer and Brian Coleman will be reprising the Tories attacks on the gay community with Section 28 like legislation in the run up to the next election? This policy was very popular in Tory circles during the reign of Margaret Thatcher, who is a hero to both Brian Coleman and Mike Freer. These policies were at their height presumably about the time Freer and Coleman first joined the Tories, so one has to suspect that they agreed with them in some way.

Will Barnet Council be bringing in policies which favour married couples over those living in sin, to protect the sanctity of the sexual act? I wonder if Brian Gordon could possibly give us a few examples of "right thinking people" who've been perverted by posters such as this, so we can judge for ourselves how damaging these posters are?

Councillor Brian Gordon is assistant cabinet member for policy and performance. I wonder what direction policy will be going in future on the subject of the "sanctity of sexual relations". It's clear from his protest that he's less concerned with performance than policy in such issues.

I'd suggest that Councillor Gordon lays down a few proposals at the next Council meeting. It seems that he could liven the session up no end.

Brian Coleman and Richard Barnbrook

As it's saturday, I thought I'd put the spotlight on London's two disgraced assembly members. Both of these rather naughty chappies have been found guilty of failing to discharge their duties in an appropriate manner. Both of them appear to have told a few porkies along the way.

Here's an example of Colemans porkies. This is one he told about me attending Residents forum meetings in Barnet. There are 18 of these a year in Barnet. I've been to 3 in my life. Coleman said this to a standards investigator in an interview (see clipping below from his witness statement). He was trying to portray me as an obsessive opponent. For the record, the last meeting I went to was to complain about the state of the youth football pitches at Burnt Oak leisure centre. The deputy mayor was there and he agreed to take a look and do something. (you can find a few more examples of Colemanporks by clicking HERE)

And here's a what naughty old BNP Barnbrook's been up to :-

http://torytroll.blogspot.com/2009/09/richard-barnbrook-suspended-for-murder.html

Earlier in the year, I was rather surprised to read this report in Totally Jewish, detailing how Brian Coleman had boycotted a holocaust memorial service, arranged by the GLA. The reason for the boycott? The organisers felt that seating Barnbrook who's BNP leader has in the past denied the holocaust, should not be seated at the front with victims of the holocaust. To me the concept of even allowing a senior politician from the party which is Britains version of the Nazi party to attend a holocaust memorial is repugnant, let alone allowing him to sit at the front. Brian Coleman saw things different. He boycotted the service to stand up for Barnbrook's right as an elected BNP member to attend and sit at the front. Here's the full story.

http://www.totallyjewish.com/news/world/c-11069/shoah-memorial-day-marred-by-disputes/

Whilst there are a few big differences between Brian Coleman and Richard Barnbrook, it seems to me that there is one rather big similarity. They can, shall we say, be rather economical with the truth when it suits them. My dear old dad used to often say "If a man cannot be trusted in small things, how can you trust them in big things".

I don't believe that there is any place in public life for people who have been shown to be completely untrustworthy. I don't care whether they are BNP, Tory Lib-dem or Labour, if you can't trust them they shouldn't be doing the job. There are lots of Tory councillors in Barnet, who I think are honest and trustworthy, even if I disagree with them. John Hart, Fiona Bulmer, Andrew Harper to name a few, are people who strike me as honest and decent - there are plenty of others.

The reason I seek to highlight these two individuals, Conservative Coleman and BNP Barnbrook is this. The BNP use Brian Coleman as an example of a politician who behaves badly. They say, "we are different, we are clean. Vote for us and sweep the likes of Coleman away". As you can see, Barnbrook shows that the BNP are a completely dishonest bunch. A couple of Tory Councillors have let me know that privately they are appalled by Brian Coleman's behaviour. That is the difference. Coleman is a bad apple in the barrel. The BNP is a barrel full of bad apples. If you don't want to vote Tory because of Brian Coleman, don't vote for a mob that are 10 times worse.

Do you think Rupert Murdoch and the Sun have visited Barnet Recently

"The Sun" has come out in favour of the Conservative party. Let me remind you of what the Party Rupert Murdoch supports has done in Barnet, where it has power.
* Imposed a budget cut to abolish Sheltered Housing Wardens for the Borough's Elderly and Infirm
* Spent millions on consultants to write reports about reports about reports, none of which seem to lead anywhere
* Lost £27.4 million by borrowing money to invest in high interest accounts in Icelandic banks, which went bust
* Spent £15,000 on Tellies for senior Council officers
* Increased allowances for Councillors so that they now cost over £1 Million
* Overspent by £11 million on the £12 million Aerodrome Road Bridge project, leaving another huge hole in Council reserves
* Used depleted reserves to artificially keep Council Tax low, in the year before an election, despite describing the previous Lib/Lab administration as "criminally negligent" for doing the same
* Spent taxpayers money to put  video clips of people making neo-nazi statements on You Tube, proclaiming anti-semitic propaganda. (This was only removed following pressure from the Bloggers of Barnet)
* Spent Taxpayers money sending Council Leader Mike Freer and former CEO Leo Boland on jollies to America.
* Spent Taxpayers money sending Council officers on Jollies to the South of France to attend "property development conferences".
* Raised Council tax by levels many times higher than inflation
* Raised the cost of burying dead babies by many times the rate of inflation, hitting bereaved parents where it hurts at their most vulnerable time possible
* Used Taxpayers cash to launch a standards complaint against a solicitor representing the elderly and disabled of Barnet, purely for doing too good a job

What sort of people are running the Conservative Party in Barnet?

Council Leader Mike Freer - Describes his opponents as Nutters and claims they masturbate while criticising him, during a recorded interview (podcast) as Council leader

Mayor of Barnet, Brian Coleman -  The first Mayor of Barnet to be found guilty of a breach of the Standards Code whilst in office. What did he do about this to make amends? He went on a Champagne fuelled binge to celebrate

Hendon Parliamentary Candidate, Former Deputy Leader Matthew Offord. Boasted about arranging Contractors for Aerodrome Road on the Hendon Conservatives website. Those contractors were responsible for the £11 Million cost overrun. As Cabinet Member for community safety has allowed areas of the Borough to become no go zones.

Deputy Leader Lynn Hillan  - Claims that Barnet Council listens to residents. Ignored the 85% of residents who took part in the Sheltered Housing Warden consultation who said "Keep our wardens". According to Councillor Hillan "We know best"

And then there's the Tory Councillor who described the whole of the Labour group as freaks, there's the one who said "residents expect us to wipe their arses" (forgetting that many Council carers do just that for the disabled), and the one who said he didn't want to talk to elderly residents who are facing the loss of their wardens because "it was too upsetting".

I must confess I don't know any of the Tory Councillors too well. I can't tell you what they are really like, but the man they chose as Mayor, Brian Coleman said they are all completely self obsessed, whilst under oath, talking  to a standards investigator. And how does Mr Coleman view himself? I'll leave the last word to him. This is what he said about the Tories picking him as Mayor (this is bottom of page 8 in his witness statement).

The myth of the Ryanair Council

Following on from yesterdays discussion regarding Barnet Council Leader Mike Freer's plans to turn Barnet into a "Ryanair" council. Mike Freer really doesn't understand the Ryanair business model at all. Lets have a look at a few things a "real" Ryanair Council might do.

* Abolish the post of Mayor & sell the mayoral limo. A Ryanair council doesn't need this sort of extravigance.

* Cut the number of Councillors by 2/3rds. Ryanair only employs people it really needs.

* Slash the salaries of senior Council officers. Ryanair Pilots are paid far less than their equivalents at full price airlines.

* Abolish expensive and wasteful self publicity programs. Does the CEO of Ryanair have a blog paid for by the company.

* Ban expensive jollies such as trips to the USA and Cannes in France, which cost the taxpayer tens of thousands of pounds over the last few years

Having looked at where a Ryanair council may save costs, lets now look at why Ryanair are probably one of the worlds most successful Airlines.

* They do what they are supposed to extremely well (ie they fly you from A to B). In none of Mike Freer's discussions does he talk about delivering the basic services he's supposed to properly.

* They recognise that the customer has a choice. Poor saps such as us who live in the London Borough of Barnet have no choice whatsoever.

* They provide the service which their customers desire for less money than their competetors. A quick review of the Council Tax rates of other London Council's shows that Barnet are an expensive option.

* They have a clear focus on what they are supposed to provide. Adult social provision is the most basic service which a council can provide.

There is a rather sad little article in yesterdays Evening Standard. There is a rather unpleasant and insensitive quote from one of our Tory Councillors

Conservative councillor John Hart said: "With council tenants, it has been a lot of 'my a**e needs wiping, and somebody from the council can come and do it for me'."

May I point out to Councillor John Hart that there are many people in Barnet who require the Council to wipe their arse for them. They are the victims of strokes, senility, dementia and Alzheimers disease. My own father in law required the provision of these services for several years. Having seen council carers in action, I think it is disgusting that their efforts are dismissed in such a crass manner. Mike Freer explains further planned changes

"Just as Ryanair and easyJet passengers choose to spend their budget on either flying at peaktime or having an in-flight meal, recipients of adult social care in Barnet will choose to spend a limited budget on whether to have a cleaner or a respite carer, or even a holiday to Eastbourne. "

It is quite clear from this statement that Freer hasn't got a clue about the lives of people with disability. If someone cannot function without a cleaner and a respite carer, he is legally not allowed to remove the service. It's called a duty of care. As to the holiday in Eastbourne, if someone is severly disabled with no access to a normal holiday and no relatives to take them, it is only right and proper that the council provides such a break. Mr Freer doesn't talk about cutting down on council executive jollies to the USA and Cannes in France, so why pick on the weakest and most vulnerable.

Freer has no objection to Brian Coleman trousering over £100,000 from the public purse, being shipped around in a mayoral limosine and getting more luxury hampers from GLA suppliers than the rest of his GLA colleagues put together. Sort that out first, leave the poor and disabled who need carers to wipe their arses in peace.

Are Barnets Tories keeping there manifesto promises?

As I mentioned earlier this week, I don't think so. What do the local papers think this week?


"Barnet Conservatives regained control of the Council. We had been elected with 5
key priorities...

1. Supporting the Vulnerable
http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/topstories/4542066.Motor_neurone_mother_loses__vital__child_social_care/

2. Improving Roads and Pavements

3. A Cleaner and Greener Barnet
http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/4534823.Consultation_extension_not__consistent_and_fair_/

4. Tackling Crime

http://www.edgware-today.co.uk/tn/news.cfm?id=31080&headline=Barnet%E2%80%99s%20burglary%20rate%20puts%20it%20among%20worst-hit%20areas

http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/4540064.Nightclub_s_late_close_bid_prompts_fury_among_neighbours/

5. A First Class Education Service.
http://www.edgware-today.co.uk/tn/News.cfm?id=31011&headline=Primary%20age%20children%20reported%20for%20most%20racism

Well at least the roads are OK this week. Are Council Leader Mike Freer and Mayor Brian Coleman bovvered?

Still look on the bright side, the Tories have managed to give themselves a nice new town hall to have civic receptions in

http://www.edgware-today.co.uk/tn/News.cfm?id=30309&headline=Town%20hall%20reopens%20%20after%20%A31.5m%20facelift

Exclusive : Brian Coleman Smear campaign exposed !

As regular readers of this blog will know, one of the main sources of new stories for the blog is unsolicted emails received from people I don't know. As I'm not a "professional blogger" I don't publish my email address on the blog, but it's easy enough to get in touch for people who want to. I've recently received an email from a very upset person who claimed that there are people running a vicious smear campaign against our beloved Mayor of Barnet, Brian Coleman. My informant informs me that Mr Coleman is a much loved local politician who brings joy to all. He is the hardest working Conservative London Assembly member and is loved by the ordinary people of Barnet. My informant also points out that if he was as bad as the "smearers" claim, he wouldn't have been appointed by Boris Johnson to be head of the London Emergency Services and he wouldn't have been appointed to be Mayor of Barnet in a unanamous vote by the Barnet Conservative group.

Well, as I believe in fairness, I thought I'd investigate. What I've found in my investigation is a plethora of websites and blogs printing all sorts of stories about Mr Coleman.

Here are a few with a brief description
http://isbriancolemanatediouscock.co.uk/ - This nasty site is a fairly simple jobby. It simply asks a question and attempts to provide an answer.

http://torytroll.blogspot.com/search/label/Brian%20Coleman - This is run by a "Journalist" - Adam Bienkov. Mr Bienkov has an unhealthy interest in our beloved mayor's expenses. It seems he's nothing better to do than sift through old expense claims, in the vain hope of finding outrageously high taxi bills or expensive gifts from people supplying services to the Fire services. Surely Mr Bienkov should realise that Mr Coleman would never do such a thing.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/davehillblog - This is an official Lefty blog on the well know Stalinist rag "The Guardian". Mr Hill is a Labour apparatchik, who quite clearly never has a good word to say about Brian Coleman. My correspondant notes that Mr Hill clearly wants to get rid of Mr Coleman because Mr Hill knows how popular Mr Coleman is and how the Labour party is scared to death of him. As my Correspondant notes "If Councillor Coleman is really damaging the Conservatives, why would Dave Hill be trying to get rid of him?"

http://colemansgottogo.blogspot.com/ - This mischievious single issue website is dedicated purely to getting rid of Mr Coleman. Amongst the vicious smears it, it has stooped as low as to compare Mr Coleman to the Dickensian character Mr Bumble. As you will see from the pictures at the top of this blog, the comparisson is completely unfair.

http://www.notthebarnettimes.co.uk - It also seems that Conservatives are involved in the conspiracy. This website, run by "Don't Call Me Dave", has also joined in on the feeding frenzy. Whilst my correspondent doesn't mention this site, it would be most unfair to you the reader to think it is merely the lefties who are "having a go".

As you can see, there's quite a motley collection in this conspiracy. Of course, the Barnet Eye would never take part in a vicious, unwarranted, politically orchestrated campaign such as that described by my correspondent. As my correspondent tells me Mr Coleman is a "tireless public servant", who is a "caring son to his elderly mother" and a "tireless campaigner for good causes" - let us look at his contribution in a cool calm collected light.

The charges against Mr Coleman:-

He's a freeloader - it is true that he has taken more free gifts/ hospitality than the rest of the GLA members. His list takes up approx 1/4 of the list. He also has another list on LEFPA site. Is he a freeloader? Well I have been assured by a local Labour activist who works in McDonalds that he is partial to a McDonalds and he does pay for it himself. I have also seen him buy himself a glass of wine at the Mill Hill Music Festival. I guess you'll just have to see what he has to say about the subject HERE and make up your own mind.

He's taking the mickey with his expense claims - Since his appointment to the GLA he's claimed more for taxi's than the rest of the assembly put together. To be fair to Mr Coleman, he has had a driving ban and he did have to carry around his chain of office, which he simply feels totally naked without. Is it unreasonable to leave a cab running meter running for hours, whilst eating a banquet at the public expense? According to Oxfam, this figure (approx £400) could provide a basic meal for 1,600 starving children. Make your own mind up.

He is less than transparent with his expenses - He was the last GLA assembly member to put his expenses on line and claimed that it was "none of the public's business". Well we the electors are the boss. I don't know about you, but I always thought that the boss had the ultimate say on our expenses. I think that all expense details should be sent out so that we can decide if we are re electing people who stand for what we want. Incumbants have a huge advantage. If they have been reasonable with their expenses then they'll still have a huge advantage.

He looks like Mr Bumble - Well, I personally can see no resemblance whatsoever. You have the picture, you decide.

So in answer to my correspondants claim that there is a "shameful campaign of smears" against Mr Coleman. The defintion of smear in the Cambridge online dictionary is

Definition

smear (ACCUSATION)
noun [C]
an accusation which is unpleasant, unreasonable or unlikely to be true and which is made publicly with the intention of harming a person's reputation:
The prime minister has dismissed the allegations as smears and innuendo.
She claims she was the victim of a smear campaign (= repeated attempts to damage her reputation).

At the Barnet Eye, we don't want to tell you how to think. We just present the evidence and let you make up your own mind. What do you think? Is he a saintly figure who has been treated in a beastly fashion or is he an arrogant mickey taker who deserves everything he gets?

Brent Cross Railway - The system of the Future

As some of you may know, this blog strongly supports the proposal for the Brent Cross Railway (BCR). This is a tram system that will link up the Boroughs of Barnet and Brent with a hub at Brent Cross. Much of the route for this is under used and disused rail lines. The proposal would link up the High Barnet and the Edgware branches of the Northern Line, massively reduce traffic around the new Brent Cross development and offer a quicker, greener and more efficient way to get to work for thousands of commuters and school children. The London Borough of Brent strongly supports the scheme. Unfortunately the London Borough of Barnet doesn't.

Barnet likes to pride itself on being a "pro car" administration, with it's various policies such as road hump removal. Opposing the BCR proposal is another feather in the cap of the pro car lobby. Now I've never really understood the concept of "pro car" and "pro rail" lobbies (other than the vested interests of the companies servicing each industry). I'm in the "pro getting from A to B lobby". This means sometimes we have to build unpopular roads (most big roads are unpopular), sometimes we have to build railways and sometimes we have to spend lots of cash.

The Brent Cross scheme is a simple and relatively cheap scheme. Knowing that this blog has championed it, I received an email suggesting to me that the scheme is fundamentally flawed and that the costs could be slashed, whilst maintaining the service levels and improving the green credentials. Whilst my engineering credentials are soundly in the music engineering camp, I certainly can see the logic in what is being suggested.

One of the major costs in the proposed scheme is the electrification of the route, to power the trams. It has been suggested that this is expensive, outdated technology. The fuel of the future is Hydrogen Cell. If the trams were powered by hydrogen cell technology, then miles of copper wiring wouldn't be needed. Major power installations could be scrapped. It is also suggested that some of the route could be used for dual purpose vehicles, half bus/half trams. These could branch off and add even more destinations than the existing scheme could offer. This would negate the need to lay new tracks in some areas. It has been suggested that new road signalling technology be deployed, to clear the roadways for these vehicles. It has been suggested that these lanes could be signalled bus lanes, ie cars can use them until the bus comes, then they move over. There is nothing more frustrating than being stuck in traffic, next to an empty bus lane.

Now I've no idea if this technology really will work. I don't know if rail/road vehicles are feasible. I don't know if signal controlled bus lanes are feasible. What I do know is that for gridlocked cities such as London they deserve serious research and consideration. It can't be right that the North Circular is gridlocked every day whilst a few hundred yards away, there is a railway used by 12 trains a day, in the bits which haven't been abandoned. It certainly deserves a more serious analysis than Brian Coleman's "men in lofts with trainsets" quip.

Harrow Tory Candidate has crabs !!!!

For once I can say that maybe Brian Coleman is right. Do you remember when he said "Twitter is for Twits"?

Well I just checked the website for Harrow West Tory PPC Dr Rachel Joyce and she proudly announces the following :-

caught a few crabs in padstow bay. brilliant!

Well, it made me snigger. Now come on Rachel, you're a doctor, surely you must have thought about how us nasty lefties would twist it, you of all people should have spotted this coming? Thanks for the laugh though.

I'm off to bed now. After a great Morrissey gig, that rounded off the evening perfectly.

David Cameron & the Same old Tory story

How can David Cameron possibly continue to defend his communications chief, Andy Coulson? Tory bloggers rightly went potty about Damian McBride's smear campaign, but surely Andy Coulson's sins are much greater. McBride making up lies is bad enough, but Coulson was editor of the News of the World, where a systematic coampaign of phone tapping took place. His defence is reminiscent of Mike Freer's whenever a scandal such as Iceland hits the news "I know nothing" he shouts from the ramparts. The BBC reports his evidence and to be quite honest it is sickening. With reports of Councils spying on private citizens, could it be that Cameron sees this talent as useful for building up a big brother state when he takes charge.

Rather like Boris sticking with Brian Coleman, following his profligate waste of public money on taxi's, which he keeps waiting for hours while he scoffs down free dinners, Cameron seems set on keeping someone who clearly has no place in any democratic political party. What can we conclude about the sort of regime he wants to run?

The one possible redeeming feature I thought a Conservative government may bring for me was the prospect that it would role back the Big Brother state we are silently sleepwalking into. Instead we have Coulson in charge of communications. What next, Count Dracula in charge of bloodbanks.

Ask yourself this. When a future Prime Minister asks his head of communications, Andy Coulson this question, what answer may he get?

"Andy, I'm worried that some MP's may be plotting behind my back. There have been reports of secret mobile phone conversations, what do you think we should do?"

Scary, isn't it.

Boris must sack Brian Coleman for this misuse of his expenses.

Boris Johnson set a very useful precident with his treatment of Ian Clement's abuse of expenses. If you do not declare them accurately, you get the sack.

The Barnet Eye has uncovered a rather alarming discrepancy in Brian Coleman's declaration of his expenses. Boris knows what he must do now. Let me explain.

The Barnet Eye has a very useful rule. If you tell porkies and we find out, we tell the world. Brian Coleman told his closest friends in the Barnet Conservative Party that I'd been monstrously unfair to him regarding my blog last November about his Free Dinner register. Brian told his friends that I'd cruelly misrepresented the fact that he declared everything possible on his GLA register (even a pair of cheap cufflinks) whilst some of his colleagues were less transparent in their declarations. How has Brian Coleman acted since I ran the blog?

I recently followed up the story with an update detailing all of the free dinners since then. In the course of researching the blog, I found that the Tory Troll blog had uncovered an entirely different set of free dinners, not covered by the GLA list. This list was solely devoted to the free dinners Brian Coleman had as a result of his membership of the London Fire and Emergancy Planning Authority (LFEPA). The full list of this hospitality is listed at the bottom of this blog. So you've got it so far. A free dinner list for GLA work (as detailed by me) and a free dinner list for LFEPA work (as detailed by the Troll). Now Brian Coleman has two expense accounts. One for business conducted for his role as a GLA member and one for business conducted as a LFEPA member. If Brian Coleman's work as chairman of the LFEPA demands that he goes to a free dinner, requiring a cab home on LFEPA expenses, then the dinner must appear in the LFEPA free dinner list. Dave Hill of the Guardian reported that Brian Coleman ran up a near £400 taxi bill on his LFEPA account attending the Lord Mayors Banquet on the 10th November 2008. This dinner does not appear in the LFEPA list below. It does however appear on original GLA list in my November 2008 Blog as :-
MEMBERS GLA EXPENSES - BRIAN COLEMAN
10-Nov-08
Lord Mayor's Banquet at the Guildhall
The Lord Mayor and Sheriffs of the Corporation of London

Brian Coleman has declared that his attendance of the Banquet was on GLA not LFEPA business. He claimed the cab on his LFEPA taxi account. This is the man who told everyone that he "scrupulously declared every event, even if it wasn't really relevant". So why did he do this. Could it be because he knew his GLA expenses would be published and we'd spot it? The LFEPA expenses were only divulged after a Freedom of Information request was lodged.

Boris Johnson promised honesty and transparency in his regime. Quite apart from the fact that expecting the Taxpayer to foot a £400 bill is grounds enough for sacking, to try and hide it in this way is clearly not on. Boris really has no choice. He appointed Brian Coleman to the LFEPA chairmanship, with it's huge salary for a part time job (around £25,000 pa). How has Brian Coleman repaid him, to use it as a free taxi service for his other job. I really can't see how he can avoid sacking Coleman now?

Brian Coleman's LFEPA declarations (from the Tory Troll Blog).

Councillor Brian Coleman (LFEPA Chair)

• Lunch on 27/9/07 provided by Deputy Fire Commissioner
  
• Dinner on 23/10/07 provided by Sir Ken Knight
  
• Lunch on 30/10/07 provided by Asset Co
  
• Lunch on 26/11/07 provided by James Flynn, LFEPA Head of Communications
  
• Dinner on 21/4/08 provided by Licensing Committee of the City of London Corporation
  
• Lunch on 28/5/08 provided by Mr David Cartwright
  
• Lunch on 2/7/08 provided by 4Ps
  
• Dinner on 2/7/08 provided by T-Systems (sister company of T-Mobile)
  
• Dinner on 17/7/08 provided by Sir Ken Knight
  
• Dinner on 23/7/08 provided by Mr John Shannon
  
• Lunch on 26/8/08 provided by Mr John Smith
  
• Dinner on 1/12/08 provided by Chief Fire & Rescue Adviser
  
• Harvey Nichols hamper provided by John Shannon Asset Co on 24/12/08
  
• Dinner on 19/1/09 provided by John Shannon