Barnet Council releases official response to the sinking of the Titanic

Stroll on. A major supplier of Barnet Council 2e2 went into administration, putting the councils IT platform at risk. Local campaigners have been warning about the risks associated with failed outsourcing for years, but the council is in complete denial, despite half a dozen examples of complete failure to manage such projects within Barnet Council ( These are only the ones we know about). My fellow Barnet blogger Mr Mustard responded to an email I sent him on the subject by speculating as to how Barnet Council would have responded if it was the organisation operating the Titanic when it sunk. Mr Mustard suggested

"This event has enabled us to improve the way in which our future ships are riveted together"

On reflection, I would suggest this would be the type of thing they may put out. I'd be interested to see any suggestions you may have. A free Bombay Bad Boy pot noodle at Mill Hill Music Complex for the best one.

"No one could have anticipated that an Iceberg would appear in the Northern Atlantic Sea. Officers Checked the horizon several hours before the crash and gave the horizon a clean bill of health. Whilst loss of life is always regrettable, it must be pointed out that of those actually resuced 100% survived. Cleaarly there are lessons to be learned from the sinking of the Titanic and the Council is pleased to announce that we will be launching four new Titanics next week to compensate for the failure of the one in the Atlantic last night. We believe that the problems encountered with the Titanic last night are due to the previous Labour administration at the Council eleven years ago and that as the new fleet of Titanics have been built to One Barnet specifications, only bloggers, Cafe Owners and American ex pats could possibly doubt that they will be completely Iceberg proof".

Bloggers Breakfast at the Arts Depot

At 8am this morning I attended a bloggers breakfast at the Arts Depot. The Arts Depot had invited the local bloggers along to engage with us and explain their policies. This was useful as it clarified a few things which I've always been rather unsure about. The CEO Tracy Cooper gave us a rundown on the history of Arts Depot. She also explained how the Council was the owner, the Arts Depot were a tenant and a company called Megraj administered the parts not used by the Arts Depot.

The current hot potato is the eviction of Community Focus from Arts Depot in three months time to accomodate an organisation called London Studio Centres, who are a Dance school. Ms Cooper explained that due to council cuts in grant, the deal London Studio Centre was the only way that Arts Depot could be saved from closure. If this were to happen, then Community Focus would have been evicted anyway, so she felt it was the only way to save some of the organisation. She explained how Arts Depot had lost £450,000 in grants since 2011. She also explained how Barnet College had pulled out of the building, leaving another huge gap in funding. Furthermore, the council had failed to agree a deal for the "landmark library" in the building.

Ms Cooper also explained the cost cutting which has taken place, including slashing 1/3rd of all staff. Another issue is the small size of the theatre space (395 seats) effectively prevents any large shows from being staged at the centre.

As the council has effectively ended funding for community projects, community focus is departing and a prestigious London Dance School is moving to the building, it seems to me that the original concept of the Arts Depot is dead. The building is no longer a community space. I have no doubt that it is good for Barnet to have a prestigious dance school on its doorstep (unless you are a small independent, commercial, locally run dance school). In the same position as Ms Cooper, I would undoubtedly try and save something from the wreckage. It is good that she is seeking to engage with local bloggers to help her promote what is left of the Arts Depot. She has followed the local Police in taking a positive attitude to local leaders in social media.

Having a better understanding of the decision to evict Community Focus certainly means that this blog will be far less critical of Ms Cooper and her decision.

At the end of the day, yet again, the true cause of the problem lies with Barnet Council. Arms Length Management Organisations are all the rage in Barnet. We have Barnet Homes, Your Choice Barnet and Arts Depot all independent of the Council and all independent of local democratic control. They all have shrinking budgets and seemingly impossible constraints. Arts Depot is a classic example of what happens when hands are washed. The local people are left high and dry. Arts Depot is metamorphasising into a venue attached to a well respected Dance School. It will be great for Dancers across London and it will bring revenue into Barnet. What it won't do is improve accessibility to local arts and creativity for local people, especially those people with special needs who have been using Community Focus.

It seems to me that Arts Depot is rather like the Pantiles Pub on the North Circular Road. That fine old bulding has been transformed into a MacDonalds. Yes the building is still their with its architectural features,

Once a Catholic ..... A few thoughts on the Papal election

As I write this a group of elderly single men are in the process of deciding who will be their next boss. They are also deciding who will be the leader of the worlds 1.5 million Roman Catholics. The Papacy may be the oldest job on the planet. It has its advantages - travel, a nice flat, your very own special car. It has its disadvantages - no sex, no wife, you can't invite your mates around to watch smutty movies and there are a whole bunch of nutcases who yesterday had never heard of you and tomorrow will want to murder you. Despite the huge size and wealth of the organisation, there is not a big salary, there is no pension scheme and you don't get to buy your own Premiership Football club, no matter how much you like football. You never get a Sunday off and you also have to work at Christmas and Easter.

Given the extraordinary lineage of the job of Pope, a question that many non Catholic people ask is "what useful things have Popes ever done" (assuming you consider leading 1.5 billion people not very important).

Well there are a few things they've given us, that I'd guess even the most grudging of athiest may give a nod to. Perhaps the most widely known of these is the Gregorian Calendar, which is the calendar used by the vast majority of the Western world. if it wasn't for Pope Gregory, we'd not be living in the year 2013 in the UK. Whilst this is just a number, it gives us a certain order in our lives. I for one quite enjoyed living through the millenuium. Now I know that many other traditions and cultures have their own calendars, but as the Gregorian one meant I got to see a millenium, I rather like it.

Another great invention we can thank Popes for is the foundation of modern medical practice. Now whilst there was a little bit of enlightened self interest in this (Pope Clement VI didn't want to die of the plague), his doctor (Guy Du Chaliac) approach to  the medical issues raised by the plague in a scientific manner cannot be underestimated. Du Chaliac realised that doctors had to approach treatment of illness in a scientific manner and record symptoms and results of treatments. Being the Popes doctor, his methodology had to be taken seriously. Whilst there are many who can claim to have influenced the development of modern medicine, being the Popes physician during the bubonic plague helped cement study and scientific methodology as the way to practice medicine. Perhaps one of the better things Pope Clement did was instruct his clergy to stop blaming Jewish people for spreading the plague. Whilst to us this should seem a fairly obvious thing for a Pope to do, it reversed many centuries of blatant anti semitism.

And what of more modern Popes? Pope John XXIV is perhaps the most significant, for introducing the Vatican II changes. This brought about a seismic shift in Catholic teaching. It declared that you don't have to be a Roman Catholic to go to heaven. Up until Vatican II priests would declare that anyone who wasn't Catholic was doomed to go to hell. Even babies who were born to Catholic parents and died before baptism were doomed. This brought Catholic Theology into the 20th century and ended the unneccesary pain and suffering of many devout parents of dead children.

The significance of Pope John Paul II also cannot be underplayed. His role in the demise of communism is also highly significant. Like many Popes he became to ill and infirm to effectively manage the church towards the end of his life. If he'd resigned like his successor before his powers completely faded, I suspect history would have judged him in a far better light.

His successor Benedict has made one important new precedent. He has resigned. This may be one of the biggest changes, if the idea is adopted.

So the question has to be, what do I, as a Roman Catholic want from a new Pope. Well lets say I'm on the very liberal wing of the church. I want to see the organisation put all of its energy into social justice. I want to see the church move away from all its hangups with sexual conduct. I would like to see priests be able to marry and married people be able to be priests. I would like to see the church accept that peoples sexual conduct is a matter for their conscience and not as a rod to beat people with. I would like to see the church take responsibility for the past behaviour of the small number of its members of the clergy towards young people. I would like to see it redefine its pro life policies, so the phrase meant exactly what it says. I cannot see how a Christian can claim to be pro life, yet support capital punishment, summary state execution or economic polices which consign whole sections of the planet to starvation and death. As far as I'm concerned these are the real issues which threaten lives and all are avoidable and the morality is copmpletely clear cut.

We are all in this together. The Pope is a spiritual leader and it is important for everyone on the planet who cares about the wellbeing of his fellow citizens that the Cardinals choose the right man for the job. There are many people who see the Roman Catholic Church as a historic relic or irrelevant. There are many who do not see it as a force for good or something which should even exist in the 21st Century. If the Cardinals pick the right man for the job, I don't expect the likes of Richard Dawkins to be sitting in the pews next to me reciting the Lords Prayer. I do however think that if they pick the right person, even the likes of Richard Dawkins may grudgingly accept that they have done a good job and made the world a bit of a better place for everyone. There are not many jobs where 1.5 billion people take some account of your views. That is why I hope they pick sombody wise, humble, honest and decent, with the wisdom of Soloman but with compassion and a good understanding of the society we live in.

Why won't Barnet Council acknowledge the fact that outsourcing is risky?

The leader of the council, Richard Cornelius has been making a big play recently of his view that without the One Barnet Outsourcing program, the council will have to make further cuts to balance the books. He has based this supposition on the projected savings in the One Barnet business case. If you take these figures at face value, Mr Cornelius is correct. If however you look at what actually has happened in previous Barnet Council outsourcing projects, any objective person would say "Hang on, these savings are not guaranteed, in fact it could all go horribly wrong".

Yesterday it was revealed that yet another outsourcing contract had failed, this time with 2E2. Huge costs have been incurred placing emergency arrangements in place. Even more alarmingly the company passed a Barnet Council credit check shortly before going bust.

Barnet Council has a history of incompetence in managing contractors. The fact that 2E2 happened after the Metpro crisis, when the problems were supposedly fixed, shows that we just cannot trust the council when it comes to managing contracts with suppliers. APSE has suggested sensible changes to in house operations which would potentially match the savings available from outsourcing, with minimal risk and Barnet would retain control. This would also save local jobs. The council didn't even bother to discuss this. Here is a brief and non exhaustive list of major problems with council suppliers (these are a few we know about).

Metpro  - Spent £1.4 million with security firm who were insolvent, not SIA or CRB checked and when audited found that 30% of services used were unneccesary.

RM Countrysides -  Spent millions with the company and bloggers uncovered a "pay them what they want" email in an FoI request. No financial control at all and council didn't follow their own rules on employing contractors.

SAP Project - System to manage procurement. Originally meant to cost £6 million in 2006, so far has cost £24 million and still has problems.

Your Choice Barnet - Council set up this Local Authority Trading Company to manage care for vulnerable people. Despite having a virtual captive market and copper bottomed supply contracts, recently needed a taxpayer funded baleout just to stay solvent.

2E2 - Councils IT supplier. Went bust and left the council in the lurch despite Council officers doing a financial health check on the company weeks before its insolvency. Hundreds of thousands of pounds cost to taxpayer to simply keep the council IT services functioning. Deputy Leader of the Council, Daniel Thomas stated he was happy with how Council Officers had managed it when interviewed by Barnet Times.

Catalyst Care Homes - Council sued for £10 million by Catalyst as they weren't making enough money out of the contract. Catalyst won.

In every single case, the council had entered these arrangements believing it provided a cheaper and better service than an in house option. In every case it has gone wrong and cost the taxpayer a fortune. The council claims that there are no risks in the One Barnet Business plan. Would you back the council with their form? I wouldn't.

If you think the Council should see sense, join us on 23rd March for the Barnet Spring protest against this madness

Saracens Match Day CPZ - Update from the Council

The following update regarding the Saracens RFC Matchday CPZ was published today on the Barnet Council website. We have published it in full without comment as we believe this is of interest to many people in Mill Hill. The original is available by following the link detailed below.

http://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=4557

Neil Richardson, the Highways Manager, provided the Committee with a verbal update on the Saracens Event Day Controlled Parking Zone. 

Mr Richardson informed the Committee that the primary features of the Event Day Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) were:

• To ensure effectiveness for the area;
• To ensure that the use of the developed Barnet Copthall Stadium did not adversely impact on residents and traders and other community based activities; and
• That Saracens would meet all reasonable costs to introduce and maintain the measures, including enforcement of any restrictions introduced.

The Highways Manager advised the committee that kick-off times would be varied throughout the season and that there would be no kick-offs before 12.00 noon. 

The Committee were informed that there were 7,500 people in the CPZ that were eligible to apply for a permit or visitor’s vouchers.  Households could apply for up to 88 parking vouchers per annum, with additional vouchers being made available to support congregations and other community activities.

The Highways Manager noted the importance of making sure that the highways were safe for all road users.  The Committee were advised that only one test match had taken place so far at the Copthall Stadium on 27 January 2013.  Officers reported that “light” enforcement had been undertaken on that day where vehicles in contravention of parking restrictions were given a leaflet advising of the Event Day parking controls and advising drivers of the dates of the remaining matches for the current season.  The Highways Manager also advised the Committee that a similar approach would be taken at the next match on 16 February 2013, but that yellow line restrictions would be enforced.

Lisa Wright, the Traffic and Development Manager, informed the committee that Officers will be monitoring each match of the current season to assess the parking impact.

The Highways Manager informed the Committee that they would be carrying out another consultation with every property in the area at the end of the current season, asking for views on the scheme.  Comments made would be taken on board to help determine whether any changes to the scheme might be required moving forward. 

Referring to the light enforcement, where leaflets were given to cars that would otherwise have received tickets, a Member questioned how many of these leaflets had been issued.  He was advised by Officers that the figure was approximately 140 leaflets.  Responding to a question, Officers informed the Committee that the vehicles that were leafleted as part of the light enforcement were situated throughout the CPZ.  Officers advised the Committee that the attendance for the match was approximately 3,700.  The Committee noted that as this was a test game, the maximum attendance would be in the region of 4,000.  Attendance was expected to be higher at future matches.

A Member questioned if it was unusual for residents to not have to pay for permits.  Officers responded that it was, but that they were being provided at zero cost to residents by Saracens in recognition that there would be some impact on residents on match days.   Responding to a question from the Committee, the Highways Manager advised that the resident’s permits and parking vouchers arrangement was legally binding.

The Chairman invited Mill Hill Ward Councillors, John Hart and Sury Khatri, to address the Committee.

Councillor John Hart noted that the scheme was still in its early days.  He informed the Committee that many people were unhappy with the five hour period of the parking restrictions, and questioned whether this period was necessary.  Councillor Hart informed the Committee that he had attended the Mill Hill Resident’s Association with Councillor Sury Khatri where approximately 300 people had been in attendance in relation to this matter. Councillor Hart also highlighted that people could misuse the parking vouchers. 

Councillor Hart highlighted to the Committee that the attendees of the last match were largely from the home team and suggested that these attendees could be managed more easily that the supporters of the visiting team.  He informed the Committee that the Copthall Open Space should be considered as an open space for everyone.  Councillor Hart also noted that improvements had been made in the area as a result of the development.

A Member referred to Councillor Hart’s contribution to a previous Planning and Environment Committee and asked Councillor Hart to confirm that Saracens had agreed to that the maximum capacity of the stadium would 10,000 people and no more.  Councillor Hart confirmed that this was correct.

Councillor Sury Khatri addressed the Committee and highlighted his concern that Ward Members had not had enough involvement in the early discussions with Officers and Saracens.  Councillor Khatri questioned whether resident’s interests were being adequately considered.  Councillor Khatri suggested that all matches should start at 3:00 pm and raised concern over residents being able to have quiet enjoyment of their everyday lives.  Referring to the Human Rights Act, Councillor Khatri questioned the impact of the CPZ and stadium on resident’s rights to family life. 

A Member questioned Councillor Khatri on the 88 parking vouchers that are available to each household within the area.  Councillor Khatri informed the Committee that he did not consider this number to be sufficient.   

The Chairman then invited the Leader of the Council, Councillor Richard Cornelius, and the Director for Place, Pam Wharfe, to address the Committee.  The Director for Place invited Councillor Khatri to meet with her to discuss his concerns further. It was agreed that the meeting would involve all affected Ward Councillors.

Ms Wharfe also noted that the planning application that had been made was for 10,000 attendees only.  The Leader of the Council reaffirmed the fact that should Saracens wish to increase capacity to 15,000 in the future, then another planning application would be necessary.

The Highways Manager stated that he believed that Saracens were working to ensure that the scheme had minimal impact on residents.  Responding to a question, he informed the committee that 3,192 resident’s permits and approximately 118,000 parking vouchers had been issued, and that Saracens would pay the Council the amount for the given number of permits or vouchers issued. 

A Member raised concerns that people who were travelling to watch a match might consider that a parking ticket on account of a parking contravention could be factored in as part of the cost of a day out.  The Highways Manager informed the Committee that this was a possible risk, but where safety was being compromised, the police could be involved. 

Officers advised the committee that they were keen to conduct an audit of resident’s views of the success of the scheme, and would allow people plenty of free text to provide their opinions.  There will also be the option of both online and hard copies. Ward Councillors requested that they were involved with the drafting of the consultation.

A Member questioned what consultation had taken place at the beginning of the scheme.  The Director for Place informed the Committee that the consultation had formed part of a planning application determined by a the Planning and Environment Committee who considered that a CPZ was necessary in order to manage the impact on residents and that Officers have subsequently conducted statutory consultation. 

Councillor Khatri suggested that electronic signs should be considered as a way of reducing the five hour time period for parking restrictions.  Officers agreed to investigate the cost of variable signage.

RESOLVED that:-

1.      The Committee note the update on the Saracens Event Day Controlled Parking Zone as set out in the report and as detailed above. 

 

2.      Members note the request that adjacent Ward Councillors be involved in the CPZ review at the end of the season.

 

3.      The Committee note the invitation from the Director for Place to meet with Mill Hill Ward Members

 

4.      Officers are requested to give consideration to the costing installing variable signs for the CPZ zone.

 

5.      That the Committee requested to receive update on the review of the Saracens Event Day CPZ scheme which would be conducted at the end of the current season.

Publication date: 11/03/2013
Date of decision: 07/02/2013

Yet another outsourcing failure at Barnet Council - When will they acknowledge the risk?

Barnet Council has been hit by yet another failure of an outsourced service. This morning, I've emailed the Deputy Leader of the Council for his comment on the failure of the E2E outsourced IT services contract. A report on the councils website reveals that the failure of this service poses a significant risk to the Council, yet there is no word and no press coverage of the problems. The council seem to be burying their heads in the sand and ignoring any bad news. The councils own report says:-

The ICT services delivered include critical infrastructure services supporting the council’s ICT services. Without a suitable replacement service the council would be at risk of losing the majority of ICT in the event of any component failures.

This is the type of risk that the council wish to expose us all to with One Barnet. So, you may ask, what has happened? Basically E2E went broke and simply withdrew the sercvice. The Councils own report says

The Managed Infrastructure Service, supplied by 2e2 (UK) Limited, has since been withdrawn by the administrators, and all on-site contract services was removed on 8 February 2013.

This type of failure is never mentioned in the risk registers.

Here is what I have said to the Deputy Leader, Councillor Daniel Thomas. I've copied the Leader and the CEO, lets see what they have to say. One has to wonder what additional costs this will incur to the taxpayer?

From: Roger Tichborne

To: cllr.d.thomas@barnet.gov.uk

Cc: Cornelius, Cllr Richard Conservative ; Travers, Andrew

Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 12:09 PM

Subject: New outsourcing failure at Barnet Council - This should be ringing alarm bells

Dear Cllr Thomas

 

Please can you tell me if the information in this DPR document is as you would expect it to be?

 

http://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s7794/1946%20-%20Interim%20IT%20Infrastructure%20Support%20Solution.pdf

 

It appears to me that several important sections have been missed out.

 

I have concerns that yet another outsourced contract has failed. This report on the coouncils own website states

 

----------

8.5 The Managed Infrastructure Service, supplied by 2e2 (UK) Limited, has since been

withdrawn by the administrators, and all on-site contract services was removed on

8 February 2013.

 

8.6 The ICT services delivered include critical infrastructure services supporting the

council’s ICT services. Without a suitable replacement service the council would be

at risk of losing the majority of ICT in the event of any component failures.

 

8.7 With effect from 8 February 2012 2e2 (UK) Limited failed to meet their contract

obligations and the council has implemented an emergency procurement. Officers

have reacted immediately to the notice, and have secured an appropriate provider

against which to mitigate the risk of the continuation of the service.

---------

 

I find it odd that the problem has persisted since Feb 2012, yet the DPR is only now being signed off. This cannot give great confidence in the councils ability to manage such scenarios can it? How many such failures of outsourcing in Barnet do we need before someone wakes up to the issues of risk.

 

When will the Council wake up to the inherent risk associated with outsourcing.

 

Regards

Roger Tichborne

www.barneteye.blogspot.com

Age UK 10K Fun Run - The full report

Lucy, Rog and Hayley at the finish line in the cold, wearing our medals with pride !

Earlier today our little team completed a 10K fun run for Age UK and Age UK Barnet. Myself and Lucy Nowell ran for Age UK Barnet and Hayley Brown ran for the Age UK national charity (Hayley lives outside of the Borough, but wanted to join our team, because it was the team to join !). It was bitterly cold and our times were

Hayley - Time - 52:15 - Position - 232
Rog - Time 1:01:53 - Position - 503
Lucy - Time 1:14:17 - Position 646

A special congratulations to all runners. Having run 10K, it is not easy and it hurts ! I was a tad disappointed to miss my target time of under 1 hour, but it has given me a reason to do it again and train a bit harder !  I had to stop to get a stone out of my shoe, which had a bigger significance than I realised at the time ! Oh well, never mind. The most important thing was the money we raised and to take part in the experience.

A very special thanks to everyone who sponsored and supported Lucy, Hayley and myself. It was a tremendous effort to raise so much money and I am humbled that people have put their faith in us to raise an amount that will make a diffrence to many people who need it.

Rog keeping pace at the 5km mark

So we all made our way to Crystal Palace for a 10am start. After all of the training and efforts, the big day was here. Between us all we have so far raised just under £1,500 for the charities and I'm proud of our team. Age UK Barnet Chair, Dr Julia Hines was the team manager and organised the activities, acted as photographer and drove myself and Lucy down to the event.

Lucy on the home stretch

Today was mothers day and I dedicated my run to the memory of my dear mum, who passed away in 2008. She was 83 when she died and without her love and support, I would be nothing. She sufffered a stroke in December 2000 and made me realise the challenges many elderly locally and nationally face. She was lucky to have a large family to support her. Age UK step in when there is no network. Here is a brief description from Julia of the work Age UK Barnet do and why we should all support them.

Age UK Barnet supports and cares for older people throughout the London Borough of Barnet.
Last year they helped 3,300 people with the support of staff and our 120 volunteers.
Age UK Barnet offers practical support like information and advice, benefits advice, healthy living advice including nutritional advice, toe-nail cutting, personal grants and their handyperson service, doing odd jobs for older people like installing grab rails or even changing a light bulb (so that no-one wobbles around on a chair, falls off and breaks their hip).
Just as important are the social activities – lunch clubs, exercise classes, day trips, befriending, art and music appreciation groups, day centres, bridge, art classes, volunteering opportunities, and computer classes.
Age UK Barnet puts quality at the heart of everything they do, and works with clients to design services which they want.
Here is what one client said to us this year
“The day centres are a lifeline for us elderly people. We meet our friends, talk, discuss various things, laugh, we give birthday Christmas cards, buy cakes for our day, we keep active, we have talks, visiting choirs, tea dances, on Thursday we have Tai Chi, some raffles. We have transport to and from the centres. It’s something to look forward to. If I don’t have Thursday out it means there is nothing, everyday the same.”

The national charity does similar work across the UK helping people who are vulnerable, lonely and isolated. We did our bit today, you can do yours by adding your donation to the coffers. Please click here to donate

https://www.justgiving.com/RogT

Here is  Lucy's race report :-

By Lucy Nowell, 
 
10km? - easy I thought, having run 3 marathons in the last decade.
I was asked to do a charity run for Age UK Barnet, and registered with JustGiving a month ago.  Unfortunately, my training regime did not consist of any running; though I did take the stairs everywhere. I was always going to start running tomorrow, but, 4 weeks on, and I still hadn't bought the trainers. As I was driven to and from Crystal Palace today,  by the lovely Julia Hines, I jotted the things one should not do in preparing for a run......


1) Having a free blood pressure test at Tesco's pharmacy just the day before, and not taking their advice - after 3 scary readings - to go to a walk-in medical centre.
2) Misplacing the running number - finding it hours before setting off.
3) Buying track suit bottoms and new trainers on the day before the run - and breaking them in for the first time, on the race day!
4) No programmed training - just relying on my day to day lifestyle

and experiences on the run itself...
5) Stepping into a puddle, soiling my bright white new trainers instantly, and soaking the extra long tracksuit bottoms.  This ensured I was carrying extra weight whilst squelching my way round the park.
6) Stopping to take 120 photographs and texting my progress, or lack of it.



Would I go through all this again? yes, of course I would. The event was well organised by Age UK; the volunteers and marshals were all very encouraging, and funny. Chocolate bars, water and energy drinks after the race was most welcomed. The money Rog T and I raised for Age UK Barnet was over £1000 with gift aid, so far, and fellow runner Hayley Brown has raised over £300 Age UK. My health most certainly has benefited, by lowering blood pressure. I have also invested in my future; I found out that next year, I will qualify for being helped by Age UK!  This was not the reason for taking the challenge of the race; it is my belief,  the way we treat our elderly is a measure of society itself, and I am more than happy to have helped this worthwhile charity.

Tomorrow - Sunday 10th March is the Age UK Barnet 10K run

Tomorrow at 10am, I will be running 10K for Age UK Barnet. Myself and Lucy who is also running have raised over £1,000 (inc Giftaid) for this great cause.

Thank you to everyone who has sponsored us.

If you haven't yet, please do. Here is our Justgiving pages.


Rog's page
http://www.justgiving.com/RogT

Lucy's page
http://www.justgiving.com/LucyNowell

We'll update you with how we got on tomorrow.

Rog T's Cancer Blog - TELL US THE TRUTH !

For those of you who are regular readers and have read the previous posts on Cancer, you can skip this first paragraph.This is the latest installment in my occasional series about how I'm adjusting to living with a big C in my life.  For those of you who aren't, here's a quick summary. I'm 50 years old and I last year had a prostate biopsy following two "slightly high" PSA tests - 2.8 & 4.1. The biopsy took ten tissue samples and one of these showed a "low grade cancer" which gives me a 3+3 on the Gleason scale. I'm now on a program of active monitoring.  In early February, I got the results of the latest PSA test - down to 3.5 and an MRI scan which found absolutely nothing. My latest PSA test in August was not quite so promising, back up to 3.9, in other words the downward trend has stopped. I've no symptoms and sadly for a few people, if I'm gonna die soon, it won't be from Prostate cancer. Got the picture? 

First off, some news. I had my latest PSA test on Wednesday, so I am in that limbo period again, waiting to see if my cancerous little darlings love me or hate me. I will let you know what the result is ASAP. It is always a tad stressful waiting for the news.

Anyway, news out of the way. Let the ranting begin !

As regular readers of this blog will know, I've been trying to control my cancer's development by following an anti cancer diet, largely based on the guidence in "Anti Cancer - A New Way of Life" a book by Dr David Servan-Schrieber. The book is practical and evidence based. I have shared my views on the subject as widely as possible, via this blog and elsewhere. I've been drinking green tea and pomegranite juice, eating tomatoes, water cress & organic and I've significantly upped my exercise levels and lost weight. So the big question is whether it is any more use than a placebo? 

I was discussing this with a doctor friend, who informed me that I was spouting b*ll*cks saying that diet could influence the development of active cancers. As with all Doctors he said "where is the evidence". I asked whether he'd read the book "I have better things to do". Which sums up the attitude of the medical profession pretty well. They don't want to bother. So I said "I've been told that a PSA test pretty accurately reflects cancer progression once a positive prostate disagnosis has been identified, is this correct". My friend replied "pretty much". Then I said "And there are tens of thousands of people on active surveillance?". He replied "Yes". So I then said. "So if the NHS recruited 4,000 people, half of whom carried on their old lifestyle and half of whom undertook an anti cancer diet & appropriate lifestyle changes, and monitored the PSA levels for five years, we could see whether there were any positive statistical trends and that would settle the argument".

My Friend informed me that it isn't that simple. Someone has to pay for the trial and all manner of controls have to be built in. I retorted "Yes of course they do, but if we could get evidence to prove that dietry changes could slow cancers or in some cases eradicate them, it would save the NHS and the social security budgets billions". My friend retorted that there are "better things to spend the money on, things which have a scientific basis for investigation". 

It infurates me. There is plenty of evidence (as described in the above book) that all manner of things can affect the development of tumours. The physiological process of how tumours develop is ever better understood and strongly displays a link with environmental factors. The "missing link" is a properly funded scientifically based trial to develop diet based treatments for cancers. The should not be viewed as alternatives to conventional medicines, but for people such as me on "active surveillance", those in remission and those at risk, I believe there is a strong case for advocating lifestyle changes that would lower risk factors of cancer development.

I do not understand the total refusal of the medical profession to engage in a debate. It almost seems to me that they have a Jesuitical evangelical zeal to promote drug based treatments to the exclusion of all else. I only have one mission with regards to cancer. That is to understand and promote the lifestyle that will keep a human being as healthy as possible for as long as possible. Last year I lost a dear friend, who was given no advice on healthy lifestyles after a serious cancer diagnosis. For instance he smoked nearly to his final breath. The doctor advised him that he might as well if he enjoyed it. Would he still be here if he'd adopted my diet and kicked the smoking into touch? Would he have lived one day longer? Would the chemotherapy have worked better if he'd drunk five cups of green tea a day and eaten organic?

Who knows, but he was never given the information to have a go. That is what troubles me. What troubles me even more is that the medical profession seems in no mood to even try and find out. T

The Friday Joke 8/3/2014

Q : How many bloggers does it take to find out how many people it takes to change a lightbulb at Barnet Council?

A : You can't ask that question because it is vexatious !!!!! (or at least I can't)