A night at the Council

It’s the budget-making meeting of the Council: we’re hoping to bring you an almost live update.

We have started with a petition, though – it’s a petition on the budget. The petitioner has asked Mayor Rahman and Tower Hamlets First to do whatever he can in the budget to protect funding for the police and fire service, given the Government’s cuts in the service.

Cllr Shiria Khatun replied, asking the petitioner what he thought “this lot” could do for him.

Cllr Mahbub Alam has asked what the petitioner thought of the Labour Group: the petitioner said as far as he was aware, they often voted with the Tories.

Cllr Clare Harrisson was next to interrogate the petitioner. The Mayor was cutting funding to the 5-officer strong local Vice Squad: wasn’t he cross about this?  The petitioner said he was cross about all cuts.  Various Labour Councillors started calling out that the Mayor and Tower Hamlets First were making these cuts, so why was he calling on the Mayor to safeguard the police in his budget given that he was actually making cuts.  Etc.  Oh dear, it looks like it’s going to be a stormy meeting.

 

19.45:  The budget making meeting is quite a formal structure.  Mayor Lutfur Rahman is now moving his budget.  He has repeated that he does not want to make cuts.  However, given the reduction in money they are getting from central Government, they have done their best.  This budget is based on consultation, and amendments have been made to the original budget in the light of consultation.  He would like to fight austerity, and those who do (such as Syriza) are popular – but he cannot fight the Government on his own.  He wanted councillors to join in making a sensible budget without bickering.

19.47:  Cllr Alibor Choudhury is now moving the detail of the budget.  Again, he has criticised the Government for its cuts – but he is also worried that an incoming Labour Government has, so far, said it would not restore most of the cuts made.  It seemed a bleak future.  He would fight the cuts if he could, but again he cannot fight them on his own – though he is working with the People’s Assembly, March for Jobs, trade unions and others against austerity proposals.  Cllr Choudhury then ran through a number of London Labour Councils which were making cuts,  including losing jobs.  The budget protected the vulnerable as best they could.

19.53.   Cllr Rachael Saunders is now moving Labour amendments.  She deplored the Tory cuts but thought that Lutfur Rahman talked left but acted right – and the only way to get rid of the Tory Government was to vote Labour.  She is developing a rather sarcastic turn, which is at least amusing the Tower Hamlets First benches.  She has slipped in a reference to her assumption that Tower Hamlets First are considering whether to stand against Labour and thought they were probably overstating their importance: there hasn’t been a reply.  She seems to think that voting other than for Labour in the borough jeopardises the chances of getting rid of the Tory Government: this is not necessarily the case.

Cllr Saunders ran through the broad brush of the Labour amendments while also making a few digs at the Mayor and Tower Hamlets First.  “We all know the Mayor puts himself first – Lutfur Rahman First, not Tower Hamlets First,” she said.  She insisted Cllr Rahman is making cuts and said that Labour’s amendments would be better.

19.58:  Cllr Ayas Miah is now seconding the Labour amendments.  He is stressing the state of cleanliness in the Borough.  Cllr Saunders has already accused the Mayor of hogging the Council’s super-pooper-scooper to clean up round where he lives (I think it used to be the Deputy Mayor who used to be accused of this).  Cllr Miah is speaking rather more broadly.

20.02:  Cllr Andrew Wood is now moving the Tory amendments.  He has pointed out that the Mayor’s budget notes that economic growth will increase the Council’s income: it seems he is rather trying to take part of the credit for his party.  He has pointed out that Labour’s Newham and Tory Havering have merged several services.  He has given this and many other examples of how merging services across boroughs can save money: I suspect this can only arise because less service is delivered to the greater population the merged boroughs have.  In the process, he has pointed out how several of the Council’s departments could probably sell their services to other boroughs because they are so good.  This could be the first time a Tory Councilor has praised Mayor Rahman’s services – but, of course, if the staff were busy working on supplying services to other boroughs, they would have less time to work on providing services to our own residents.

 

Cllr Olli Rahman has, although in a calmer manner than usual, taken the bait Cllr Saunders threw out.  She has spoken to him having made a political career in fringe parties (presumably having forgotten that Labour was very keen to recruit Olli when they were trying to amass votes in the last but one General Election).  Cllr Olli Rahman has given a comprehensive answer worth catching on the Council’s film of the meeting: he has been the first to point out that Cllr Amina Ali, the shortest-lived Labour candidate for a Bradford seat, is not here tonight.

20.12:   Labour’s Councillor Danny Hassell is now speaking.  He supports in particular Labour’s amendments to cut the Mayor’s car, publicity budget and budget for political advisers.  Strangely, he is  now talking about Tower Hamlets having a bad record in take up of two year old nursery places: this is strange, as Tower Hamlets has an above average of these places according to recent information from the Council and Dfe.

20.14: The Tories’ Cllr Peter Golds is now speaking.  He has started with a gibe at Mayor Rahman by saying that he was waiving his human rights to speak.  Like Labour, he is very much against the Mayor having a budget for publicity and advisers.  He called for community cohesion and said that required us to bring young people to be part of our nation: this meant cutting funding for mother tongue teaching, which should be transferred to teaching people to speak English.  He referred to the quiet public gallery.

20.19:  Cllr Gulam Robbani is speaking.  He is picking up a point Cllr Saunders made: she said the Kobi Nazrul Centre should not be directly funded and should have to apply for a grant if it wanted money.  Cllr Robbani has defended the Centre being funded by the Council because of its importance to the community.  He has also spoken very well about language: saying that the Bangladeshi people are learning English very well, thank you – exam results show that many young Bangladeshi people speak English better than many of the young people in the borough whose parents were born in the UK.

 

20.23:  Cllr Amy Whitelock Gibb spoke up in favour of two particular Labour budget amendments.  One was funding a 24 hour noise reporting hotline, which Labour had proposed last year.  This was more important than the Mayor having advisors, etc.  The second was support for cyclists.  Together, she thought Labour was prioritising local people and the Mayor was prioritising himself.  The Mayor wanted to spend £15,000 on his car, but Labour wanted to spend £10,000 on cycle storage.

20.25: Labour’s Marc Francis has done a “young Lenin” performance telling Cllr Peter Golds that he should be ashamed of himself – he was talking about community cohesion but he fanned the flames of dis-cohesion every day.  And his Government’s cuts were the main problem and Cllr Golds had not mentioned them.  Cllr Francis commended the Mayor for a couple of aspects of the budget, such as not means testing home care, but he then produced some statistics which were different from the ones previously published by the Council – including on home care.

20.28:  Cllr Assad, Cabinet Member for Adult Services, is speaking now.  He criticised the Government cuts.  He criticised the Labour amendment to stop funding smoking cessation.  He referred to the Bangladeshi “mother tongue” struggle.

20.32:  The Tory Cllr Chapman is speaking now.  He is offering the Mayor some technical help with the preparation of the budget: that is, he should take the budget document and shred it so no one else has to read it.  Ho, ho, ho – laugh? We nearly did.  Cllr Chapman suggested that the taxpayer should be at the centre of the budget: if it wasn’t, he should ring the Tory Group, who would advise him.  Again, this speech is probably worth looking at in full on the Council’s film of the meeting: this is a good example of a well spoken speech which summarises Tory policy.

20:35:  Cllr Shahed Ali, Cabinet Member for Clean and Green, is speaking.  He has just listed the cycle support the Council has funded over the last few years and described Labour’s amendment to fund more cycle storage as a gimmick.  He says that only 23 people have signed Labour’s petition – including only Cllr Pierce from among the Labour Councillors.

20.38:  Labour’s Cllr John Pierce is on his feet.  He says the Mayor is asleep at the wheel and has brought a pitiful budget – though Labour has managed to campaign out some of the worst bits.  Again, Cllr Pierce is relying on heavy sarcasm and you should watch this for yourself.  He referred to page 89 of the budget: funds for maintaining building.  He says the Commissioners are in the Building.  He is now talking about this money only going to Lutfur Rahman’s supporters: who made the decisions?  There seems to be an inference that Mayor Rahman has diverted money on a political basis.

20.42:  Cllr  Rabina Khan is now speaking.  She supports the Mayor’s budget and believes it is an anti-austerity budget.  She is addressing measures in the Budget: and councillors on the Labour benches have grown silent (though they are not necessarily listening).  She is listing various funding pots which the Mayor’s Administration has got money from which has helped the Mayor balance the budget.  Cllr Khan finished on a personal note.  She had gone to school in Kent, where she was told not to speak Bengali as it was not recognised as a language.  When she came to Tower Hamlets, she realised bilingualism was a gift.  She thought Labour should recognise this and respect bilingualism.

 

20:46:  Cllr Rachel Blake is now speaking.  She began by appearing to read out a speech.  She referred to page 141 of the budget, and this does sound like a set political speech (who is the audience?) which she is reading out.  It is quite a contrast with Cllr Khan’s delivery.  It is full of lists of criticism of Mayor Rahman, mixed with something of a social worker type approach to mental illness.

20.48:  Cllr Ohid Ahmed is speaking now.  He too criticised Cllr Golds, reminding him of the Incident in Brent (Cllr Golds is now singing, yes singing “be careful what you say).  Cllr Ahmed is now saying that Cllr Saunders and the Labour Party do not want to work constructively with other councillors.  He believes that THF is listening to the residents, and hearing different feedback from that they are hearing from the Labour Party.  The Labour benches have interrupted and muttered throughout this speech rather.

20.52  Cllr Shiria Khatun is now expressing her condolences (several councillors have done this) for the “heart-rendering” experience the families of the three girls who have gone to Syria have had.  She is making references to matters discussed at the election court.  She supports the Labour amendments: in particular, she wants the Mayor to get a bus pass and go round the borough on the bus, on the Tube – or by walking (which would be better for his health).  She objects to the Mayor employing political advisers and believes that his Cabinet Members (councillors) should advise him.

20:55:  Cllr Shafiqul Haque has pointed out that the Mayor has been elected twice: this shows that the residents trust him.  He believes the Mayor’s Administration governs on behalf of all residents (shouts from the Labour benches that the Irish are not adequately funded?).  Cllr Haque supported the Community Cohesion work of the Council.

20:58  The Tory Cllr Chapman denied that Cllr Golds was divisive, but Cllr Chapman believed that Cllr Golds had exposed misdeeds of Tower Hamlets First, so division was down to them.  He congratulated the officers for their hard work on the budget, but thought it was ultimately the work of Tower Hamlets First.  He accused Mayor Rahman of building an empire.  He was not hopeful for the Tory budget amendments: in previous years, Tory amendments had turned up in Administration amendments before, but it probably wouldn’t work.

20.01:  Cllr Clare Harrison (Labour) is now speaking.  She is arguing back against some of the points made in the debate – not what she had prepared, but she cannot resist, she says.  She mentioned a constituent who had to go to Hackney for mental health services: it is a disgrace she cannot get these in the borough.  She said childcare costs had risen and were too high in the borough.  It meant people could not take personal decisions but had to mould their lives according to what they could afford.  Labour wanted the Mayor to work on this area more.  She thought male dominated meetings rarely prioritised child care.  Labour was better at campaigning among women, so more women came through on to the Labour benches.

21.06:   Cllr Mahbub Alam said the Mayor’s advisors were there to help the Mayor deliver his manifesto, for which he had a mandate.  The Mayor’s advisers costs were in line with costs in Labour boroughs.  Cllr Shiria Khatun has heckled – but not audibly.  He said that the car was an efficient way of getting the Mayor round as many people as possible – more than would be possible on public transport.

21:08:  Labour’s Cllr Dave Chesterton spoke about his 40 years living in the borough and the massive changes he had seen.  Tower Hamlets has more planning applications than other boroughs and because of their large scale more are referred to the London Mayor.  He felt that our planning department was very busy: he had found out that pre-application charges (to developers thinking of putting in a large application) were not the highest in London and there was room to increase them.  These charges should be increased, so that more staff could be employed in the planning department.