Should Barnet Council ban "Old Hags" from public office?

Last Tuesday, Brian Coleman, a senior member of the Conservative administration described the public gallery at a full meeting of Barnet Council as "sad, mad and a couple of old hags". The use of the term "Old Hag" is clearly a term of sexist abuse, used in its crudest form to denigrate a subsection of the female population. Mr Coleman clearly thinks that using such language to denigrate members of the public is fine. Some of us don't.

I had a brief chat with Dr Julia Hines, one of the people labelled an "old hag" by Brian Coleman this morning at a meeting at Friern Library. Julia is the chair of Age UK Barnet. She was attending the full council meeting as the policies of Barnet Council will affect the people who she represents and it shows great commitment to the community that she makes the effort to attend such meetings. Julia is very competent and able person. She is highly intelligent and very much on top of her brief. If I ever need to know any information related to issues with Barnet Council policy towards the elderly, she is the first person I ask.

Over time I've got to know Julia reasonably well. She is sociable and extremely good company and often will join the small cabal of bloggers, journalists and councillors (from all parties) who have a couple of refreshing sherbets after council meetings etc. As with the rest of the group (which includes another of the "Old Hags" Mrs Angry), we chew the cud on the meetings, share the odd joke and generally put the world to rights.

Over the course of my life, I've seen many instances where very good and capable people have been bullied and picked on. This has caused them all manner of upset and damage. For many it has deterred them from undertaking many things in life they enjoy. I've been reliably informed that even Councillor Coleman was the subject of rather nasty bullying as a youngster and this may account for his desire to be so obnoxious to other people.

One thing that is crystal clear to me is that if you are female and you are in the public spotlight, you will be subject to sexism and sexist abuse. I did a little bit of research and I found this picture

This is probably the most powerful woman in the world, Hillary Clinton having a bit of a laugh dressing up in a witches hat. I saw the picture and thought "Nice to see a woman who is confident enough to have a bit of fun". Then I noticed the URL of the website. It is http://hillaryugly.com/ - I was rather surprised to see such a site, not least because Hillary Clinton is actually not physically ugly. What was even more revealing was the text on it, which said :-

HillaryUgly.com
Beauty is only skin deep.  Ugly goes to the bone!
Not just another collection of hideous pictures of the Clintons' and friends.  True, Hillary Rodham Clinton is one ugly old Hag, but, her personality and ideas are even scarier than her looks.

So it seems that Mrs A and Dr Hines are in good company. In the eyes of some (again rather immature right wing) commentators, Hillary Clinton is an ugly old hag. Of course, the second part of the last statement really gives the game away. It is her "personality and ideas that are even scarier than her looks".  Now there are many American politicians who have ideas and personalities which are scarier than their looks. The thing is that when they are right wing males, they would not be victims of sexist and demeaning abuse.  One has to conclude that the scariest thing for the creaters of this website is the fact that Hillary Clinton has a female personality and that she has ideas of her own, because she is a very intelligent person. We have to conclude that the concept of an intelligent and articlate female with ideas of her own, scares the shit out of some boys.

I believe this same issue goes to the heart of what seems to scare Brian Coleman about Dr Julia Hines, Mrs Angry and just about every other articulate woman who disagrees with his politics in Barnet. I have sadly concluded that he resorts to personal attacks because he knows that he will lose an intellectual debate and for a clear mysoginist such as Mr Coleman this would be simply too embarrassing.





The internet has given rise to a new type of dysfunctional personality, the "sexist internet troll". They seem to gain energy from making sexist comments, be it by setting up sites such as HillaryUgly.com or perhaps even more sadly by leaving nasty comments on  local paper websites. We live in a democratic country where freedom of expression is allowed. Should we legislate against sexist language by public officials? Should we take sanction against the internet trolls? That is a very difficult question to answer, as I generally am not a fan of censorship. The other side of the coin is that if women are deterred from entering politics or public life because they will be ripped apart for their looks and have their confidence undermined.

It is clear that institutions and establishments which enact zero tolerance policies towards all forms of bullying behaviour are more successful and better run for it. If we follow the Coleman logic to it's conclusion, then we would in effect exclude everyone who doesn't fit his ideal of physical perfection from Barnet Council. The truth is that people who are picked upon and victimised eventually get fed up with it. If his behaviour puts off capable females from positions such as chair of Age UK Barnet, then Brian Coleman has done a huge disservice to public life in Barnet.

What was perhaps the most disturbing aspect of Colemans outburst was his smug gurning after issuing the insult and the way the Deputy Leader of the Council, Daniel Thomas was seen to laugh about it. At the end of the speech, the Leader of the Council, Richard Cornelius visibly applauded Brian Coleman.

I have been deeply disturbed by this whole incident. Not by the behaviour of Brian Coleman, which I know to be appalling. It is the way that his colleagues seem to be 100% behind such behaviour. I believe that Julia Hines deserves better than this. I believe that we all do. I believe that there is no place for sexism, racism or any other type of bullying behaviour in the offices of Barnet Council and I'm saddened that the people in charge seem not to care about the actions of their rather discredied colleague

** Updated 12:46 *** The People of Barnet 1 - 0 Barnet Council - FRIERN BARNET LIBRARY LATEST

Photo Courtesy of Rosie Canning

So the day after I spent the morning at Friern Barnet library with campaigners and members of Barnet Council, we made our way to Finchley Court for a hearing brought by Barnet Council to evict the occupiers of the Library. There were about 20 local people along to support.

The court officials were slightly nonplussed, by the huge turnout and were not sure what to do. Eventually we were all ushered into the courtroom to hear the case brought by Barnet Council.  Their case was simple, the occupiers are trespassers and they must be thrown out.

Pete Phoenix made the case for the occupiers. The council have in effect granted a license by entering into negotiations with the occupiers. Until these talks have concluded, it is inappropriate to evict the occupiers. There are also issues with title as the council claim to have lost the title deeds. Given that the land was given to "the people of Barnet for the purposes of a library", and the occupiers have reopened a library, it seems that the council is on rather shaky ground.

The judge was clearly unimpressed with the arguments put forward by the council. The occupiers asked for two things, firstly for the case to be struck out. They stated that if this could not be done, then they asked for a 21 day adjournment to prepare a case, given that they had only two days notice to prepare a case. Given that the council had only asked for a ten minute hearing, there was not time to hear the arguments to strike out the case, so the judge agreed to the request for a 21 day adjournment.

The lawyer representing the council bumbled that this was unacceptable as the occupiers had "no proper case". His protests were summarily dismissed by the judge, who gave the distinct impression that the council had clearly not presented any compelling arguments to support their case.

The judge then asked for an estimate of how long the case would take. The man from Barnet stated that it would be no more than 30 minutes. Mr Phoenix replied that many people wanted to speak and there would be much complicated discussion of land title and legal points. He suggested one or two days. As the council stated that there was no case, the judge agreed that the hearing would be 30 minutes, but if a  proper defence was presented, then the case would be adjourned for a full hearing. Given that there clearly is a very robust case, it seems highly unlikely that a 30 minute determination will occur and the case will progress to a full hearing.

The Barnet Eye could not believe that the council had asked for a mere ten minutes to determine the case. We must ask what on earth the councils legal team expected given the strength of public feeling.

Yesterday, the Barnet Eye asked for the council to suspend proceedings until discussions had reached their conclusion, to save the taxpayer money. The council did not have the courtesy to respond, even though they stated they would.

So we have wasted everyones morning. The occupiers are saving the taxpayer money, as there is no longer a requirement for security costing £600 a day. The people of Friern Barnet have a library. Everyone has won, yet the council are still hell bent on this Quixotic charge against common sense.

There was an interesting footnote on the proceedings. The occupiers and their supporters adjourned outside for pictures and interviews with the Press and the Ham and High. As these were going on, the lawyer from Barnet approached the group in a rather surly manner. He demanded that we gave his bag back. We all looked at each other in amazement. It appears that he put it down somewhere and had lost all of the papers relating to the case. It was quite clear from the reaction that people were rather insulted that we'd pinched his bag. We suggested that it might be more sensible to go back into the building and look for it.

That is typical of Barnet Council. They can't even look after their legal documents in a courtroom!

******* Updated 12:46************
The Leader of the Labour Party in Barnet, Alison Moore just released this announcement

Following news that the Judge has granted the ‘Licencees’ occupying Friern Barnet Library a 21 day adjournment to prepare their case to remain in the Library, Leader of Barnet Labour Group, Cllr Alison Moore said: “We’re really pleased for the local community. It is unfortunate that the council is persisting with their move to evict the ‘Licencees’ - the legal action could cost thousands in council tax payers money, when the occupiers are saving the council £600 per week in security costs for the building, and they are also providing a Library service to local people.  The eviction action should be stopped while negotiations with the ‘Licencees’ continue.”

Here Here !

Friern Library Update - meeting with Barnet Council

At 10am a group of local residents, members of various local campaigns and four officials from Barnet Council met at Friern Library for the second in a series of meetings to try and discuss a way forward for the library and also for Friary Park house.

The council was represented by Bill Murphy, Julie Taylor, Heather Wills and Mike Faye.

There was some interesting new information. It appears that the Carnegie Foundation, the original library backers may be interested in providing some new funding towards retaining the library. The scope of this offer is at present unknown.

The council officials reiterated that the council simply cannot get by without the half million pounds they expect to receive from the sale. For many local people this is a rather contentious point.

Local activist JD informed us that there was no transparency in the council figures. He asked the council to clarify the statement that other libraries needed work to become DDA compliant. Bill Murphy confirmed this. Other campaigners wondered why a compliant library was being closed and sold.

Local campaigner Mike Gee interjected to make a direct point. This lasted 25 minutes and involved a detailed analysis of the council accounts. Mike Faye admitted that such items as heating bills were not always properly apportioned. Bill Murphy expressed a desire to raise more money from renting library space for meetings. Pete Phoenix (one of the occupiers) suggested that he could organise work at Avenue House to facilitate this.

Continuing his "direct point", Mike Gee pointed out that the library allegedly had five full time staff, for the 33 hours a week it was opened. He stated that no one had ever seen five full time staff in the library.  He then stated that the accounts show that the non staff running costs for the library are £3,458.40 which is mostly the gas bill (the gas heating was left on after the building was closed).

Bill Murphy pointed out that the CEO's salary was in some way included in the bill as a hidden item (no wonder they are closing it). Everyone was rather mystified by this interjection. When he thought about what he'd said, so was Mr Murphy.

The Barnet Eye raised the forthcoming eviction process (The first round of this nasty game of council vs Friern Barnet is in court on Tuesday 18th at 10am - @Barnet County Court, St Mary's Court, Regents Pk Rd, N3 1BQ (very near Finchley Central station) please come along to show your support). The Barnet Eye suggested a suspension of this whilst negotiations progressed as a sign of good faith. As the security surveillance on an occupied building is costing £600 a day, it would seem sensible to reach an accomodation with the occupiers to look after the building until a proper use is found. The Council officers agreed to take this suggestion back to the council.

The Barnet Eye also explained that he felt that the term "investing" in libraries was misused and a proper strategy should be found to introduce real long term savings such as solar panels and out of hours usage. The Barnet Eye also suggested the meeting offered a form of engagement which the various consultations had failed to achieve.

The council officers stated that Councillor Rams could not attend as it was Rosh Hashana. Mr Oliver Natleson stated he was also Jewish but considered the library to be more important than attending a religious service.

The issue of footfall at the Arts Depot library was discussed. Apparently four people a day use this. The reopened Friern Library is seeing between 40-70 people a day.

The council summed up that they were disappointed that the Friary park offer had not been properly debated. Another meeting was scheduled for next week.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barnet Eye commentary.

Barnet Council recently changed the rules for local area forum meetings. As a result no proper debate happens. By accident, the occupation has forced all sides to engage in proper dialog under rules acceptable to all.

I would suggest that all Barnet cabinet members attend the next meeting in observer caapcity, to see real community discussions in place. Not everyone present agreed with every aspect of what happened. My blogging colleague Mr Reasonable certainly had his reservations. What is clear is that we all found it more democratic and accessible than the charade that is the residents forum meetings.

If I was Councillor Robert Rams, I would bow to the inevitable and reopen the library. It could be dressed up as a huge victory and it would lance a very unsightly boil on the bottom of the administration. Huge budget savings could be achieved and a much loved facility preserved.

Rams could claim that it showed the council listened to the community and could work with it to deliver positive outcomes in a time of budget pressures.  In a civilised society, no one gets everything they want. A reopened Friern Library with a proper librarian funded by the council, but also staffed by volunteers, generating money from being a community hub and from renting some meeting space at Friary Park (I would like to see a dedicated centre for NEET youngsters here) would represent a victory for all.

A new form of social engagement could be developed that would be a genuine model for other councils, engaging all members of the community would be a real and lasting legacy for Richard Cornelius. Let's hope he has the vision to grab it.

Brian Coleman obviously hasn't been talking to Dan Thomas about One Barnet

One Barnet. What is the Conservative administrations official viewpoint. I have seen two stabs at attempting to outline it recently. One was on a blog, which has in the past expressed views close to the Leadership of the Council. It said

Barnet Council has major funding issues at present. The government has cut grants and we are committed to keeping council tax as low as possible. We believe this to be the best way to help hard pressed household budgets.

Whilst public service trades unions clearly have a vested interest in achieving the best possible deal from the Barnet taxpayer, it is the responsibility of the council to get the best possible deal for everybody. By making efficiencies, more services can be provided. When services are provided by the private sector, quality of service guarantees can be built in. These guarantee improvements to the quality of services provided and ensure that services improve.

Trades unions in Barnet have singularly failed to acknowledge the level of planning and due diligence which has been spent making sure One Barnet delivers the best possible deal for the Barnet taxpayer. Much has been made, by trades union sympathisers, of the risks associated with outsourcing. They have said nothing of the risks of not making efficiencies and the resulting service cuts. In short, if the council simply adopted the no cuts ever mantra that Barnet trades unions have publicly promoted, then the council would run out of money and be able to provide no services at all.

And then there is this. This is the official stance as laid out by Councillor Brian Coleman (thanks to the Barnet Bugle for footage). If you ignore the insults for members of the public and listen to what Coleman says, you will notice how similar it seems. In fact Coleman seems to almost quote verbatim from the above text. What is interesting is that two weeks ago I asked the Deputy Leader of the Council, Daniel Thomas, if the Friends of Freer represented the views of the administration. He denied it at great length. You can see the correspondence here - http://www.barneteye.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/councillor-dan-thomas-dialog-with.html -

It is quite clear that the deputy Leader hasn't got a clue about the One Barnet program or what the administration actually thinks. He is a sort of semi-detatched deputy Leader. Now it is of course possible that Brian Coleman was told that his punishment for being an entirely useless candidate at the GLA elections was to be given the job of defending One Barnet. It may be possible that he hadn't got a clue what to say. It may be possible that only Mrs T's comments on the FoF website are the only thing he's actually seen that amounts to a vaguely coherent defence of the councils position (with the emphasis on vaguely). It may be that unlike Councillor Dan Thomas, with his new found conversion to Barnet blogs, he decided to maintain the party line.

Coleman stated "Thewe is simply no altewnative". He goes on (after the uproar following his offensive comments "If we don't outsouwce and we don't pwivatise there will be even greater cuts in jobs and services"  and "it is this administwation that is going to impwove and enhance services and pwesewve as many jobs in Bawnet as possible" he adds "do you want to save money to impwove services and weduce council tax and we know thewe will be an ovewhelming yes to the One Bawnet pwogwam".

So tell me Daniel, if the FoF website doesn't reflect your views, why did Coleman almost quote it verbatim?

The trouble is that what both Mrs T and Bwian Colemanballs seem to have not understood, is the fact that there is an alternative. APSE have detailed it and whenever it has been properly investigated, it has been shown to be more coherent.  Coleman at no point mentioned the risks associated with oputsourcing or the APSE report and it's suggestions. I wonder if he started insulting everyone, simply because he knew he talking BS and he hoped that the complete lack of intelligence in his speech would somehow be missed if he caused an uproar.

What is clear is that no one in the adminstration wishes to talk about the real issues with One Barnet. There are the costs and the risks. No one has faced up to the council's inability to manage contractors or contain costs. If Barnet Council sign a contract for the One Barnet project, based on their previous form, this will lumber council taxpayers and business ratepayers with huge costs, as we pick up the shortfall in profits for the private contractors. Brian Coleman clearly likes to insult us. By failing to address the issues of risk, he is insulting our intelligence. This is far more worrying than anything else he's said.

It's the new thing - Anarchy in Friern Library

Isn't Barnet a wonderful place to live? You really couldn't make up half of what goes on here.

Less than a week ago, I was at a surreal meeting. It featured Barnet bloggers, crypto anarchist squatters, Local members of the save Friern Barnet Library Campaign and senior members of Barnet Council. We attended a meeting chaired under the rules of the "occupy" movement. It went rather well, tea and biscuits were served and we were all very civil to one another.

As I sat there, my mind went back to the early days of my political awakening, Anarchy in the UK by the Sex Pistols

I am an anti-Christ
I am an anarchist,
Don't know what I want
But I know how to get it.
I wanna destroy the passer by
'Cos I wanna be anarchy,
Ho dogs body

Anarchy for the UK
It's coming sometime and maybe
I give a wrong time stop a traffic line.
Your future dream is a shopping scheme
Cause I wanna be anarchy,
It's in the city

How many ways to get what you want
I use the best I use the rest
I use the NME.
I use anarchy
'Cause I wanna be anarchy,

It's the only way to be

Is this the MPLA
Or is this the UDA
Or is this the IRA
I thought it was the UK
Or just another country
Another council tenancy.

I wanna be an anarchist
(Oh what a name)
And I wanna be an anarchist
(I get pissed destroy)

 It is rather ironic that Anarchy landed in Friern Barnet. It landed and everyone rather liked it, it has reopened a well loved library and everyone has been very nice. Nothing was destroyed, no one got pissed, the MPLA and at the IRA were not in attendence, but it was in a Council tenancy.

I have been away at a family wedding. Hence the relative lack of blogging. I did however get this message from the crew at the Library. Please help if you can.

The council is putting through an eviction order of the gallant people who have returned our library to us, and are helping us in developing it as a community centre. The first round of this nasty game of council vs Friern Barnet is in court on Tuesday 18th at 10am - @Barnet County Court, St Mary's Court, Regents Pk Rd, N3 1BQ (very near Finchley Central station).

 

Please come if you can, and show your support. We'll be having a meeting on Monday evening at 6pm in the library, so you might like to come to that too, if you can.

This is our community. Let's protect it.

I suspect this is a game that's likely to go into extra time, if not a re-match. I'm sure you'll agree, it's important the fans get behind the home team. 

b/w

Paul & Fiona Brickwood

020 8368 5224  /  07949 054 806

The saturday list #15 - The achievements of Richard Cornelius as leader of Barnet Couincil

The Guardian make a film about the reopening of Friern Barnet library

Here is a film made by the Guardian about the reopening of Friern Barnet Library by activists and local protest groups


                   
                   
                   
               

The Friday Joke - 14/9/2012

Paraprosdokians ... Winston Churchill loved them!

Here is the definition: "Figure of speech in which the latter part of a sentence or phrase is surprising or unexpected; frequently used in a humorous situation."      "Where there's a will, I want to be in it!"
is a paraprosdokian.

Having been supplied with this list, I married them up with the name of the first Barnet Councillor who's name popped into my head when I read it. For some of them, it's because that is just the type of thing they'd say, for others, because it reminded me of them. They are all lovely people.

1. Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience (Dan Thomas)

2. The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on my list ( Can't possibly say)

3. Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak (Dean Cohen)

4. If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong (John Hart)

5. We never really grow up, we only learn how to act in public (Brian Gordon)

6. War does not determine who is right - only who is left ( Richard Cornelius)

7. Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad (Sachin Rajput)

8. Evening news is where they begin with 'Good Evening,' and then proceed to tell you why it isn't (Jack Cohen)

9. To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism. To steal from many is research (Barry Evangeli)

10. A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops. On my desk, I have a work station.(Maureen Braun)

11. I thought I wanted a career. Turns out I just wanted paychecks ( Andreas Tambourides)

12. Whenever I fill out an application, in the part that says, 'In case of emergency, notify:' I put 'DOCTOR.' (Danny Seal)

13. I didn't say it was your fault, I said I was blaming you (Andrew Harper)

14. Women will never be equal to men until they can walk down the street with a bald head and a beer gut, and still  think they are sexy. (Couldn't possibly say)

15. Behind every successful man is his woman. Behind the fall of a successful man is usually another woman.

16. A clear conscience is the sign of a fuzzy memory (John Hart)

17. You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice (Robert Rams)

18. Money can't buy happiness, but it sure makes misery easier to live with (Mrs Tambourides)

19. There's a fine line between cuddling and holding someone down so they can't get away (Oh dear, now this I really couldn't possibly say without a lawsuit !)

20. I used to be indecisive. Now I'm not so sure (Alison Moore)

21. You're never too old to learn something stupid ( John Marshall)

22. To be sure of hitting the target, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target (Brian Coleman)

23. Nostalgia isn't what it used to be ( Kate Salinger)

24. Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine (Robert Rams)

FoI response from Richard Cornelius regarding downgrading of domestic violence and abuse team

In a recent DPR, there was an implication that Barnet Council was downgrading support for victims of domestic abuse. The leader of the council, Richard Cornelius has responded. I have published the letter in full, as I believe the issue to be very important.

It appears on the face of it that Barnet Council are committed to maintaining this service. I would urge anyone suffering from domestic violence or abuse in Barnet, to contact the relevant department and seek to ensure that you are safe ASAP.

I hope this information is of some use to anyone who is concerned with such issues. I believe that it is an important role for local bloggers to ensure that members of the public in Barnet are kept fully up to speed with all services that the council can offer, especially in situations which are potentially life threatening. I would like to see the council work with local blogs etc to develop awareness of these services.

Cornelius Letter

The Thursday Recipe - Rog T's stir fry

For those of us who are concerned about our health, we should try and ensure that all vegetables are fresh and organic. To preserve the mineral and vitamin content, quick frying is the best way to preserve these. This recipe is one I cook all the time. This is the vegetarian version. For my children I will chop up a bit of into small strips and add with 2 mins to fry.

For those of us with cancer concerns, it is worth bearing in mind that tomatoes are better cooked to release the lycopicine's. Garlic should be chopped 10 mins before cooking to allow oxidisation. All are organic and in season vegetables. Remember to wash all vegetables prior to cooking

This feeds 2 people

Ingredients.

4 large tomatoes
1 clove of garlic
1/4 teaspoon of turmeric
1 red onion (medium size)
6 runner beans
4 medium size shitake mushrooms
2 tablespoons of soy sauce
1 medium strength red chilli
1/2 of  a medium sized leek
2 tblspoons of Olive oil
Black Pepper to taste
1 teaspoon red wine vinegar

Preparation
1. Finely chop Garlic at least 10 mins before start.
2. Chop tomatoes into 1/8ths.
3. Slice Onion
4. Top and tail runner beans, cut into 1/3r'ds and then slice crossways into 1/3rds
5. Slice mushrooms into quarters
6. finely dice chilli
7. Chop leak into sections approx 5mil

Cooking
1. heat oil in frying pan to moderate heat
2. Add tomatoes
3. After 1 min add onions & leek
4. After 2 mins add beans , mushrooms
5. After 1min, stir and add garlic, chilli,  turmeric, pepper, soy sauce, and red wine vinegar, stirring in as you go
6. Heat for approx 2 mins. Beans should have slightly crunchy consistency.

Can be served with pasta or rice if preferred. If adding steak, add at step 5. Can also be made with chicken, but slice into small strips and cook for 3 mins before adding tomatoes.