The Friday joke - Barnet Council hypocrisy

This paragraph is from a decision of the Information Commissioner as to why Mr Mustard could not be given certain information. This decision was dated 20 August 12.

This morning Mr Mustard logged into his linkedin account and found that he had been stalked on the internet, 

look who was on 3 days ago!

she is meant to be camera shy so why is her photo on linkedin?

This is rank hypocrisy Barnet Council. You had better not use this line again when you write to the Information Commissioner as you clearly find the use of the internet to see what you can find out about an individual to be acceptable behaviour.

Mr Mustard doesn't know what was what you were hoping to find out Julie but why not send an email to mrmustard@zoho.com or pop round to Mustard Mansions and we can have a nice cup of tea and a chat (or meet at Cafe Buzz for the same). 

He is rather busy though so if what you wanted to ask Mr Mustard is what is wrong with Barnet Council then he will have have to look through his diary to see when the next completely free day is.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

The May Gurney slalom course

Winter is coming (sorry) and you will be able to practice your slalom technique on the course that May Gurney are preparing on every pavement in Barnet. Here are two photographs taken near Mustard Mansions yesterday, one by Mr Mustard and one by a friend who lives a little way up the street.

Caught in the non-act

looking the other way; standard May Gurney operating procedure

What chance does a blind person stand, someone in a wheelchair, a double pushchair or even a single, the postman, the meter reader, elderly or disabled members of the public? This sort of stupidity should be stopped. Before May Gurney arrived all of those bins were in the front gardens of the houses.

Mr Mustard tweeted those photographs and a Brunswick Park resident sent him a message:

Hi,

Saw your twitter picture this morning about the May Gurney recycling collections and it reminded me that I've been wanting to rant for a while. (Mr Mustard loves a good rant)

Several months ago, all was well with our recycling collections - we put stuff out in the proper boxes, it was collected. Then something changed - we noticed that a lot of the recycled plastic was suddenly being left behind rather than taken away. I checked carefully, and everything left was properly stamped with the recycleable logo. I carried on leaving stuff out, and it kept being ignored.

Finally, I caught the collectors one week, and tackled them on it. In poor English they tried to explain that they couldn't take the plastic as it was 'the wrong shape'! Apparently, they can now only recycled plastic if it's shaped like a bottle.. words fail me. I was handed a small (May Gurney branded) sheet that explained what could and couldn't be recycled, explaining that only plastic 'bottles' can be taken.

I can understand restrictions on what can be recycled - some plastics are not recyclable. But never have I heard of restrictions being based upon 'shape'.

As I assume our waste has a value to the recycling company (and hence to the Council in terms of contract value?) I just cannot understand why a green policy isn't being followed here.

I thought you might like to highlight this absurd policy on your website as I'm sure many people would be surprised know that money is being thrown away in this manner. Delighted to assist.

Regards,

Now Mr Mustard does believe that the "leader" of the council Richard Cornelius has gone into print saying that no-one has really noticed that recycling has been outsourced. Poppycock Richard, it is just that most people can't get the energy up (unlike Mr Mustard) to complain especially when it is a case of the wrong shaped plastic (could you make it up, is it like that in CWAC quack land?)

Mr Mustard went off and checked the Barnet Council website and it does indeed say bottle shaped plastic only. Did it always say that, Mr Mustard wasn't sure and then he remembered the short hammy film "starring" Cllr Harper. Here it is all over again, luckily only 1m55s.

So there we are, nothing sinister going on and it has only ever been plastic bottles that can be recycled and as it happens the price of plastic has plummeted recently. Why you can't put out other plastic which has a logo on it showing that it can be recycled is one of those eternal mysteries. When we get the new wheelie bin for co-mingled waste things will be different? (they will because no-one will be able to see what is at the bottom of your bin!).

Now back to the main event of May Gurney very dangerously leaving the bins on the pavement. What Mr Mustard wants to know is whether Richard Cornelius doesn't know the service is cr*p because

a. he goes around with his eyes shut

b. he believes the officers who tell him things are hunky-dory

c. he doesn't care

d. he believes everything he himself says

e. the contract comes to an end soon and no-one can be bothered with it

f. he doesn't want to have to question the current One Barnet outsourcing plans based on past factual failures

g. his newspaper columns are ghost written

h. any non libellous idea you may have

May Gurney must be doing that self-monitoring nonsense which is going to be the way of the monster One Barnet contracts as only a thin client will remain who don't have enough time to do the job properly.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Yellow Fever - a Bank Holiday outbreak

A pickup called Yellow Fever

Single yellow lines are very popular places for traffic wardens to scoot along to on Bank Holidays. After all, CPZ bays are free and they have to get their denied quota from somewhere, no good going back to the office and saying there wasn't a single car wrongly parked.

Mr Mustard is indebted to Declan Hoare, the Assistant Director of Highways and Transport, for rapidly providing the info about yellow lines that he was seeking (tongue lashing on another matter to follow quite soon though!) and here it is, an explanation about the enforcement of single yellow lines on a Bank Holiday (remember, never park on double yellow lines, simples - blue badge holders might be able to but more of that on another day)

First, what Mr Mustard asked:

Dear Mr Hoare

I have thought for some time that the website which sets out the details of parking enforcement on Bank Holidays would benefit from some simplification and added clarity.

What I would suggest as a layout that would leave no room for confusion is to present the information in 2 columns, the first of which sets out the items which will be enforced and the second one sets out those that won't be enforced. Thus the motorist can easily check the position. Do you agree?

I have a question about the enforcement of single yellow lines. These are enforced but residents and dual use and pay by phone bays aren't which rather implies that a single yellow line inside of a cpz should not be enforced either. Is that the case or would a ticket be given to a motorist on a single yellow line inside a cpz during the zone hours. This question is a general one and does not relate to any particular PCN.

Yours sincerely 

Mr Mustard

and then the response

Dear Mr Mustard

Our communications team are currently reviewing all our parking web content to make it more helpful to the public. I have therefore copied this email to Chris Palmer (aka the "Tooting Twister") so that your helpful comments on how to explain bank holiday enforcement can be considered.

In respect to your other query I can confirm that single yellow lines are enforced whether in a CPZ or not. Whilst residents bays, dual and pay by phone bays are not enforced yellow lines are enforced. This is to ensure that the public do not get confused about yellow line enforcement. As we both know most members of the public are not aware about whether a particular yellow line sits inside or outside a CPZ and therefore not enforcing yellow lines solely within CPZs was considered to be unfair to motorists who might believe all yellow lines to be unenforced on bank holidays. Enforcing all yellow lines prevents that confusion. Therefore I can confirm that a ticket would be given to a motorist on a single yellow line inside a CPZ during the zone hours.

Declan Hoare

Mr Mustard disagrees with Mr Hoare that this will stop the public being confused about yellow lines. It might if there was a clear statement to that effect on the council website but there isn't.

Mr Mustard can see the thinking behind the council's argument but it is a flawed one. Most people think that the large CPZ time signs at the entrances to a zone tell you all you need to know but they don't. They tell you the hours of single yellow lines (unless marked with other times) and of marked out bays which don't have a time plate. Now given that inside a CPZ that you can park for free in a residents bay, a pay-by-phone bay or dual use bay on a Bank Holiday then it is an easy step from there to thinking that the single yellow line inside a CPZ will also be off. That is a mistake that will cost you £110 (or £55 if the parking ticket is still on your windscreen when you reach your car, many are going missing, that will be the subject of another blog). 

The question is why anything except double yellows, parking on junctions and being an obstruction (the police may deal with this) i.e. dangerous parking, are not the only thing that are being enforced on a Bank Holiday. There is much less traffic on the road. The thing to do is to write to your local ward councillors and ask them to get the council to stop enforcing on a Bank Holiday. You can find their details here.

Our quality of life should come before revenue raising on a Bank Holiday.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Londonist guest bloggette

Mr Mustard is very grateful to the comprehensive site about London, Londonist, for their permission to reproduce the above drawing of how London could be divided up and the introductory paragraph, viz:

London’s boroughs, it seems to us, are all wrong.

It isn’t their abilities to empty bins, tarmac roads or stage amusing performing arts festivals that bother us (at least, not on this occasion).

No, the problem is their size.

You can read the rest of the thought provoking article here, on this link  'full article on Londonist' 

Mr Mustard is also grateful to the friend who brought this to his attention and thought that the  region containing Barnet should be called Barr-enf-ey but Mr Mustard, being Mr Mustard, had his own idea and though it should be called BEn-Har (please don't write in and complain about the bad jokes). Mr Mustard also thought, and this was last week when the news of non-stick not sticking it out at Barnet and then going to Haringey would put him in number 1 spot for the job of the CEO of a triple sized borough.

That was of course before the people of Haringey, pretty fleet of foot down there, started a petition protesting about the appointment of non-stick which has to be confirmed by full council on 16 October. This is the link to the petition.

Mr Mustard has never heard of such a petition ever being started and he is not going to sign it because he does not live in Haringey (although he did in about 1978) and he rather thinks that Barnet would be improved by a better Chief Executive. Mr Mustard wonders if non-stick has actually handed in his written resignation and as arrangements have already been made to cover his work the idea of his going is pretty certain. Even if he hasn't actually signed a resignation letter no person of honour could stay now as they have signalled their intention to leave and so must leave if they are to have any credibility at all.

In case anyone is interested there are quite a few vacancies on Iona coming up.

Finally, would bloggers of Haringey please look through all the Barnet links on this site and get in touch if you want to know anything.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Ken Loach lambasts One Barnet

The Billion Pound Gamble website

 

 

Press Release - 9th October 2012

 

Award winning Film Director Ken Loach has lambasted Barnet Council's One Barnet outsourcing programme in a scathing attack in a new documentary film "Barnet - The Billion Pound Gamble", directed by Charles Honderick. Mr Loach was interviewed exclusively for the film and says:

 

"A billion pounds, now that’s money you will pay, Barnet residents will pay, and the jobs that will be provided will probably not be in Barnet. A lot of the jobs will go to other boroughs or even outside of Britain altogether."

Mr Loach notes that taxpayers are getting poor value for money as jobs leave the borough, causing poverty, hardship and economic decline.

"Now that’s a bad deal for Barnet because you want your rates and money put in to go to support your local economy, to go to support Barnet people & this is not about being narrow & excluding others, this is just commonsense that we need local communities to thrive & the end of that logic, that says the money should go to the cheapest workers is of course that the money goes to those who eat grass first."

As well as Mr Loach, the film features people from all walks of life in Barnet talking about their experiences and looks at all aspects of life in Barnet in 2012, including the relocation of Barnet Football club to Harrow, the closure of Friern Barnet Library, the cost of parking in the High Street and the provision of care services for the disabled and elderly.

 

Director Charles Honderick said "The film gives a voice to everyone who cares about what is happening in their community. The stories we have heard are stories which should be shared. Some of the things you will see you will find hard to believe can happen in a civilised society". Mr Honderick continued "As a filmmaker I am honoured to have my work recognised by Ken Loach. He has spent years making films with power and meaning. His wise words are ones we'd be foolish to ignore".

 

The film has its world premiere at the Phoenix Cinema in Finchley at 6pm on Monday 22nd October 2012. Admission is priced at £1

 

You can see the full interview with Mr Loach at the film website 

Charitable Giving is Expensive (in Barnet)

Here is the text an an email sent this morning Richard Cornelius the "leader" of the council and copied to every councillor.

Dear Leader

Do you want to be the leader of an administration that makes old ladies cry? You are.

Do you want to be the leader of an administration that bleeds money out of motorists on bank holidays? You are.

Do you want to be the leader of an administration that makes the lives of the disabled harder than they need to be? You are.

Do you want to be the leader of an administration that penalises people who give to charity? You are.

I have managed to get your officers to see sense, cancel the parking ticket and refund the money to the lady who was collecting a death certificate from the hospice at the same time as her brother was also a resident there. The blog link is at the end.

I have just taken up the cudgels on behalf of a motorist who received a parking ticket opposite Angelo's (in your ward) at 4.04pm on Bank Holiday Monday. There is absolutely no need for bank holiday enforcement to be anything other than the same as for Sundays. Why don't you take a look at the parking income and expense of a typical Bank Holiday and then you will doubtless see that the light isn't worth the candle. Think of the positive publicity you will get from scrapping penalty charges on a Bank Holiday (except on double yellows and for dangerous and obstructive parking). The strange thing is that the council think it OK to let anybody park for free outside my house in a CPZ in a resident or shared pay-by-phone / residents bay, the very spaces which are under pressure because most residents are at home on a Bank Holiday, but some poor sap parking outside a church in N20 gets hit with a parking ticket when there would be very few people on the road (except traffic wardens on scooters having a ball).

I recently read at PATAS (Parking & Traffic Appeals Service) of a case involving a resident who has cerebral palsy and needs a motorised wheelchair to get about. Was any mercy shown to him by your administration? No, none at all. The blog link is at the end.

This week I read of another case at PATAS concerning a man dropping off goods to be sold at a charity shop. Here is a copy of the decision by the adjudicator (with the name of the motorist removed)

Mr has appeared in person.

Mr A's evidence is that he was parked to make a delivery to the Barnados shop to which he is a regular donor and a letter from Barnados is submitted in evidence confirming a donation on 7 April 2012. I have noted that there was no observation period by the CEO (see footnote). Mr A says that he would have been in the shop for no more than a minute.

I am satisfied from his evidence that he was properly parked for unloading purposes and I therefore find that the alleged contravention did not occur.

I am also not satisfied that the PCN was correctly issued. There is no photographic evidence and the Council's evidence is contradictory. The case summary says that the PCN was affixed to the windscreen of the vehicle while the CEO's notes state that it was handed to the driver. I accept Mr A's evidence that he was not handed a PCN and that there was no PCN attached to the car when he came out of the shop.

Thus you are the leader of an administration that thinks it is OK to try and get an extra donation from a resident of £60 when he is clearly already doing his bit. Will he be rushing to Barnados to donate in the future?

Questions that come into my mind are:

1. why do traffic wardens issue parking tickets instantly? it wouldn't be to meet the secret ticket targets would it?

2. why was no notice taken of a letter from a Charity established in 1867? The sort of organisation unlikely to spend their time fabricating stories.

3. why did no-one at NSL show any common-sense?

4. why did no-one at Barnet Council show any common-sense?

5. why do residents have to go through 5 months of stress and uncertainty? The parking ticket was issued on 7 April and should have been cancelled as soon as the letter from Barnados arrived.

6. why do traffic wardens cheat and lie?

7. are NSL properly supervised? (I will answer that one for you. No, they are not)

If you want to ask an officer for the history of this parking ticket you will need the number which is AG57534977.

Now let us think about One Barnet.

Parking enforcement is contracted out to NSL but their performance reflects on the council. There is a retained thin client of 5 officers. The question is whether this contract is working.

Well judging by the state of the Special Parking Account at the end of quarter one it clearly isn't as it is £1,200,000 down on budget (which actually doesn't matter in my view and nothing should be done about it other than getting NSL to do their job properly or sacking them if they are incapable).

If it is partly the case that officers haven't been doing their jobs properly, maybe the transfer of information was badly handled, then officers will be avoiding putting themselves into the spotlight by suggesting termination of the Contract.

Given the state of the contract you ought to put internal audit in there as soon as possible.

By the errors of judgment that are being made in the appeals process the contract clearly isn't working as the council appears to be ruthless and uncaring, against the disabled, anti big society and money-grabbing.

Parking is an easy service to outsource as there are clear rules and yet it has gone wrong despite outsourcing to a supposedly professional outfit.

Now multiply this up from £3m a year to £275m or £750m (DRS & NSCSO) and think:

Will a private company actually do a proper or better job? I don't think it is an automatic assumption, your own parking department's results last year at PATAS were much better than you are getting now.

Can you properly supervise a contractor with a thin client structure? Not if the example of parking is to be believed. The task of deciding upon informal parking ticket representations in cases of mitigation will now be considered by the council and not by NSL who are contracted to deal with them.

Will extra income be generated and will costs be reduced? Judging by the shortage on the Special Parking Account in one quarter of £1.2m which is equivalent to 2 years worth of the aspirational savings that NSL were going to bring I, if I were you, would be a very worried man indeed.

You are a capable small businessman and I would expect and hope that you have already requested a detailed analysis of what has gone right with NSL and what has gone wrong and look at how the handover was handled and then think again about the monster One Barnet contracts. The downside of a mere 1% drop in council tax recovery would negate £2,000,000 of cost savings.

Makes you think, doesn't it?

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

http://lbbspending.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/councillors-do-have-hearts.html

http://lbbspending.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/barnet-council-putting-community-last.html

Footnote: The Contract with NSL allows them to issue a parking ticket in the time that it takes to do so in pay-by-phone bays, residents and dual use bays.

Vouching for the vouchered

Parikiaki

The following email was sent to the "leader" of Barnet Council, Cllr Richard Cornelius, on the evening of Saturday 6 October (whilst it was to the forefront of Mr Mustard's mind) and copied to the other 62 councillors (sorry to spoil your evening with work councillors, well those of you that don't delete Mr Mustard's emails on arrival, that is). It is far too early for a reply and Mr Mustard gets a reply only some of the time. Mr Mustard is sure that Mr Cornelius, being a polite chap wants to reply, but knows that if his reply is not robust enough, rather like the typical Barnet Council contract, always assuming one exists, Mr Mustard will forensically dissect his reply and write again. Do you remember the Longstaff letters - Mr Mustard never heard from Goldenarse again (Mr Mustard often finds his letters get placed into the too difficult pile) although he half expects to bump into him in Cafe Buzz one day now that he has found out how good the food is there.

Dear Cllr Cornelius

I am writing to you to tell you that I have today witnessed first hand that the parking vouchers are not the solution to the parking payment problem. Nor is pay-by-phone as they both suffer from the problem of delay which leaves motorists vulnerable to receiving a parking ticket (PCN) during the period in which they are paying.

Today I was in Cafe Buzz enjoying a late lunch (cheese and mushroom omelette with salad, the omelette was light and fluffy, you should try one some time) when a lady came in. She went to the counter and asked for a parking permit and after being asked opted for a 1 hour permit. As she went outside I heard a commotion. A traffic warden was issuing a ticket and was deaf to the explanation of the lady who was waving her voucher around. The traffic warden finished off the issuance of the parking ticket and went on her way. So, as it happens, did the lady. She did not return to the cafe to buy any food or drink.

Forget that it happens to be Cafe Buzz, I also frequent Dorys Cafe in High Barnet which has also suffered a huge drop in trade since meters were removed.

The potential lady customer did not come back into Cafe Buzz. She is a regular so will appear on a future date and I will be a witness to what happened and assist her with her appeal which should not, of course, be necessary.

Now you are a polite man. Imagine that you do not have a free permit and that you have to pay for your parking. You turn up and park your car near to a cafe or shop somewhere in Barnet. Firstly you have to find a shop which sells these vouchers. You may be unlucky in the first place that you try. You reach the second one, the clock is ticking. There are two people in front of you, the first one is paying for their meal and the second is placing their order, they are undecided and it takes a minute or so. You are too polite to butt in and ask for a parking voucher, I would be the same (council business is not more important in a shop or cafe than their own turnover). There is no requirement to observe your car in a pay-by-phone bay for longer than is necessary to issue the ticket which is a fast process. So you get back to your car and you find a parking ticket affixed to the windscreen. Are you mad? yes you are, as you have paid for your parking.

Now you are locked in a battle with a faceless corporation to get a ticket, that should not have been issued, cancelled. Can you feel the injustice? the waste of time, the High Streets of Barnet decaying, the voters changing side?

Pay-by-phone has the same flaw as a traffic warden can issue a ticket faster than you can pay. I don't think you tweet but you really need to use twitter and see for yourself the tweets of people who have tried to pay-by-phone and driven off because they got cut off 4 times, or who have paid 2 minutes before the parking ticket was issued. Never mind "Labour isn't Working" (and I don't do politics with a big p) "parking isn't working" in Barnet.

You know what is needed. It is a payment method that is simple and instant. There is a popular machine that fits the bill. It is called a parking meter. Do you know they have some nowadays that take cash and credit cards and you find them right next to where you want to park. As I travel around the country I see them everywhere. Isn't it about time Barnet caught up and got some?

I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regasrds (sic)

Mr Mustard

Mr Mustard was using his laptop computer sitting on the sofa when he sent this and with the tiny 7" screen he didn't notice he had not spelled regards correctly but luckily most people won't notice and his phrase "potential lady customer" should have read "lady potential customer" as she did look like a lady. Please can you apologise to her Helen on behalf of Mr Mustard.