Don't believe everything you read in the papers

Mr Mustard reads the Guardian but in the great tradition of Private Eye he is going to cancel his subscription after he read this article. The title "The One Barnet campaign shows local democracy is alive and well" has seen the word "democracy" replaced by"campaign" except that it can't come out of the url address. The bloggers of Barnet don't seem to agree nor are they amused. There are plenty of bloggers and activists to talk to before you write an article about a place you don't know. Mr Mustard has copied the article across and added his commentary.

Despite widespread, fierce and well publicised local objection, the One Barnet programme rumbles on. The One Barnet programnme is little known because the public weren't consulted or told about it much. The outsourcing of parking enforcement to NSL on 1 May 12 is a One Barnet contract. Who knew? Go to any High Street in the borough of barnet and ask the question, "Can you tell me what One barnet is?" and be surprised that only 1% of the populace do.

This month a judicial review into the scheme, brought by local campaigners angered by what they described as a wholesale privatisation of essential community services, failed when the Court of Appeal found in favour of the council. Actually the JR was brought by Maria Nash alone supported by her many friends.

Despite its misleading name, the controversial scheme is not a single sale of services in one contract. What One Barnet isn't about is not news. Here is what the council say One Barnet is, link here. One Barnet is the overall name for the major change projects running across the council.

It is the creation of two major, multi-million pound agreements between the local authority and Capita, forming a public-private partnership, which will revolutionise how we consider our councils to have administered their responsibilities. Judge Underhill said that it wasn't a partnership in the usual sense. Mr Mustard says it is simply two massive outsourcing contracts.

The first 10-year deal creates a £130m joint venture between Barnet and Capita to provide the majority of the council's visible services: planning, regeneration, environmental health, highways, transport and trading standards are all rolled into the major restructure. The Joint Venture idea was discounted at the very start of the negotiations and was the result of a sudden change of direction by Officers (staff) the real reason for which will only become clear later.

The second deal, also lasting a decade and worth an eye-watering £350m, is a straightforward commercial contract through which Capita will provide "customer and support services" to Barnet – in layman's terms, the back office (estates, payroll, human resources, IT and the like). Importantly, the council included customer services and revenue and benefits administration in this contract, with the inherent risk to reputation that contains. The sum is large but is only eye-watering if it is much higher or larger than you would expect. As the price breakdown is commercially sensitive we won't find out easily. Customer services and Revs&Bens are not "back office" services. They are clearly customer facing. Why should councillors who can resign and leave the problems they cause behind them at any moment (and might be forced to in May 2014) be fretting about reputation?

Trowers & Hamlins, the legal firm operating on these deals on behalf of the London Borough of Barnet, is right to describe these contracts as "groundbreaking" and "cutting edge". Once we finally see the (redacted) contracts a view can be taken on this. This legal firm must have advised on what consultation with residents was necessary and Judge Underhill was clear that consultation was inadequate.

Make no mistake, the pace of change sparked by the Court of Appeal decision will be rapid. Mr Mustard very much doubts that the steps taken in Barnet to abdicate responsibility for contracts will be widely replicated in 10 year contracts all over the place as they limit the ability of a council to respond quickly to changes.

This week inaugurates a new era of local government, and changes what is meant by the term "council". Nonsense. The role of councils is clear; it is to provide local services, all that has happened is that one council has embarked on two contracts which probably won't run their entire course or lead to the promised savings.Ideological rifts aside, local authorities are in an insidious position, having lost almost 40% of their pre-2010 budget. Er, invidious, was that? Councils have not lost 40% of their budgets in 4 years. They might have had that level of cut in their central government funding but that is to ignore income from services provided and locally collected Council Tax which in Barnet's case they have chosen to freeze for 5 years. A modest inflationary increase would have seen more money in town hall coffers.

For many, balancing the books while continuing to provide even only the most essential services (child protection and care for an ageing population, for example) requires a dramatic re-think of what local services are and how they should be provided. This isn't what has happened in Barnet.

Though it may provoke local battles, there is no alternative but to work with new providers and in new ways. There is an alternative. To become the most boring, ruthlessly efficient council in the country.
Barnet's two-contract agreement will be the first of many similar efforts across the country, and these agreements will change the meaning of local government. We'll see.

To an extent this shift has already begun, but the fantasy that the drawbridge could still be brought up can no longer be indulged. Outsourcing is a trend which will stop when it dawns on councils (South West One anybody?) that the promised savings are not achieved and that if you want to add anything extra it costs you dear as you are over a barrel and that if you want to change anything you have to negotiate a contract change which is too slow.

But though change is inevitable, it must be tracked and monitored. Agreed but how open and transparent are the council? Barnet will do their utmost to make sure they keep the lid on contract failures.

We must understand exactly how the way councils work is changing, and assess what this means for the quality of service provision and how residents interact with local authorities. Forced channel shift is one of the pleasures awaiting old people in Barnet where last year they tried to make all Blue Badge holders apply for renewals on line. Thanks to Mr Mustard a manual form is now available again.

What will it mean for local accountability? Local accountability will go as councillors won't be able to talk to officers locally about a problem.

Who will be the strongest players and decision makers in our local communities? Capita will.

We must know who is doing what, with whom, and how well it is considered to be working – by the residents, not just by the bean counters. The annual survey of residents will make interesting reading once Capita have been in place for a year.

Much has been made of what the One Barnet affair means for local democracy. As well it should. The next crop of councillors in May 14, whoever they are, are largely stuck with a contract they may not want, and in May 2018 & May 2022.

Some will claim that the decision of the Court of Appeal flies in the face of the ideals of democracy, as the local authority ploughs ahead with its plans despite the visible objection of so many residents. The Judicial review was merely a test of whether the council had followed the law or not; it was not a judgment about democracy.

Rather, I'd argue that the campaign against the contracts has re-ignited local interest in local government and public services, and what they mean for us all. Almost with you on this point. More local interest is still needed though as I think the percentage of involved voters is still only at the 1% mark. Mr Mustard was late to the party in 2011. Voter turnout is pretty poor.

Local democracy is alive and well: if they don't like what they see, the people of Barnet will make their voices heard at the ballot box next year. Democracy in Barnet is in a parlous state. A democratic council does not change the rules of residents forums so that questions cannot be asked about policy. It does not disband the scrutiny committee that was set up to look at One Barnet. It allows residents to speak at committees (no-one has been allowed to speak at Cabinet Resources Committee since Cllr Dan Thomas, one of the sponsoring councillors of One Barnet, took over). A democratic council clearly tells its residents what it is doing. The ballot box in May 2014 is a blunt instrument. By this measure we can only have a democratic voice once every 4 years which is simply not good enough.

Next time, come and meet a blogger or activist before you put pen to paper. Then you'll get both sides of the story.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Open letter from the Barnet Bloggers

Were Barnet's Tory councillors secretly whipped? 
Barnet bloggers call for an investigation.

At Barnet Council’s full council meeting on 16 July, Councillor Brian Coleman alleged that Barnet’s Conservative members are ‘entirely whipped’ when attending scrutiny and other Council meetings, including those dealing with the highly controversial One Barnet privatisation programme.

According to the Council’s constitution, any whipping arrangements must be declared, but we believe that no such declarations have been made at any of the relevant recent meetings. Such actions would be in breach of the constitution and therefore unlawful.

If Councillor Coleman’s allegations are true, this clearly has very serious implications and casts into doubt the legality of many of the highly significant decisions which have been taken by the current administration, most importantly the decision to grant two massive contracts to Capita and Capita Symonds in the outsourcing of a large number of our local council services.

We therefore call on the Leader of the council, Councillor Richard Cornelius, to instigate an immediate and independent public inquiry into the claims made by his former colleague, and we also ask that the authority’s external auditors at Grant Thornton should as a matter of public interest hold an urgent inquiry into the allegations. Residents need to know whether decisions have been made legally and whether Tory councillors have acted constitutionally.

Signed:

Derek Dishman
John Dix
Vicki Morris
Theresa Musgrove
Roger Tichborne

19 July 2013

What London Councils think the role of a councillor is

This is some pre-reading for you in advance of a post that is coming out at 8am tomorrow.

As most readers will know one councillor has had the habit for a long time of refusing to respond to correspondence that does not come from a ward constituent even  though he was on the Cabinet and he was the GLA member for the whole borough. If anyone else had been that councillor they would have been, Mr Mustard expects, prepared to correspond on any topic affecting a council tax payer in Barnet (and Camden).

Mr Mustard has also noted that other councillors have deleted emails unread. This is not an accidental deletion that only happens to Mr Mustard, it has also been noted by Roger at the Barnet Eye.

Mr Mustard has received deleted unread messages from the computers of the following councillors:

Maureen Braun

Daniel Thomas (although he probably reads them on his work system)

Kate Salinger (Brian reads them to her?)

John Marshall

Geoffrey Johnson

Agnes Slocombe

Anita Campbell

Alison Cornelius (just once, Richard could have told her the content)

Julie Johnson

It could be that they read the email on a colleagues machine or for technical reasons appear to delete unread. If that is you do please let Mr Mustard know that you at least read his emails even if you then forget all about them (if you like living dangerously as an email might come back to bite you).

Now Mr Mustard was wondering what support there was for his view that every councillor in every ward should listen to any resident from any ward and then today, whilst thinking about members' allowances he stumbled over the answer in the following report from London Councils from which ruling councillors, with the notable and honourable exception of the Salingers (look, they had tea with Uncle Eric afterwards) were happy to take advice to increase members' allowances.  

Mr Mustard though is more interested in the page giving the job profile of a councillor (some of Barnet's didn't read past the juicy allowances up to page 11)

London Councils Remuneration Report for Councillors

Let Mr Mustard repeat the key paragraph:

To contribute constructively to open government and democratic renewal through active encouragement of the community to participate generally in the government of the area.

Mr Mustard thinks that means that you cannot barricade yourself in your ward, stick your fingers in your ears going "la la la I can't hear you" and refuse to communicate with anyone from the borough of Barnet who is not in your ward.

Hello Mrs Angry. This other section will please you, sort of. It is from page 2 so councillors have surely read it?

A number of authorities have set up appraisal systems for councillors. We commend this initiative and believe that it should be widely adopted.

Widely would include Barnet one supposes. The sooner the council start doing appraisals of councillors the sooner they won't need to be richly appraised by you; do you think they secretly enjoy the fame of appearing in your blog?

Mr Mustard asks very little of councillors; really only that they do the jobs they are paid for.

Now a challenge. This invitation is open to any councillor to write a blog post about One Barnet, as short or as long as you like which Mr Mustard will publish in full, without changes and without sticking his comments in red all the way through. The purpose is to start a much needed debate with the residents of Barnet. Don't all rush at once.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Barnet bloggers' open letter to council leader Richard Cornelius

Barnet bloggers: now sack Brian Coleman from the Cabinet

picture courtesy of Mrs Angry of Broken Barnet

Barnet bloggers' open letter to council leader Richard Cornelius:

For the sake of Barnet, Sack Brian Coleman!

Dear Councillor Cornelius,

The people of Barnet have spoken.

The London Assembly result on 3 May was a resounding rejection of the policies of your administration and of a prominent member of your leadership team.

As you were not leader at the time of the 2010 election, and most of your unpopular polices were not part of the manifesto, we ask you to consider the following proposals, with a view to changing the course of your administration.

1. Dismiss Brian Coleman from your Cabinet. Mr Coleman was decisively rejected by Barnet voters in the London Assembly election and to allow him to continue in post is an insult.

2. Reopen Friern Barnet Library immediately. This well-supported community asset cannot be replaced successfully at the Artsdepot.

3. With local traders, campaigns and stakeholders, create a parking regime that will enhance the environment and restore the fortunes of Barnet’s high streets. Parking charges should manage traffic, not rake in cash. No more hikes in parking charges; reduce charges as necessary, including in CPZs.

4. Cut the rate paid to all freelance consultants employed by Barnet by 25%. Large city firms including JP Morgan and Lloyds TSB have instituted such a policy in response to the harsh economic times. Any consultant not prepared to take a cut would be terminated as per contract terms.

5. Cut the pay of all Barnet Council staff earning more than £150,000 p.a. by 20% and staff on £100,000 - £150,000 p.a. by 10%. The savings in 4. and 5. would generate far more than the sum lost through the parking changes above.

6. Immediately halt the One Barnet outsourcing programme. Dismiss all consultants engaged on the programme.

7. Invite the council trade unions to identify savings and efficiencies within Barnet Council, at the same time protecting services, jobs, and pay and conditions. This exercise should also be opened up to Councillors and members of the public.

8. Invite members of the public to form an oversight panel, to scrutinise contracts and accounts with suppliers. Give the panel access to all council contract information, subject to signing of confidentiality agreements. The panel would report directly to the chair of the audit committee.

9. Cut all councillor allowances by 10%, to show that we really are “all in this together”, and review the excessive allowances paid to Cabinet members and Committee chairs. Learn the lessons of the upset caused to voters by the "Allowancegate" scandal.

10. Stop harassing members of the public involved in protests against discredited council policies. Work with residents, not against them, to improve Barnet. Embrace democracy!

In the year of the 100th anniversary of the Titanic, we ask: do you want to be the political equivalent of the captain who hit the iceberg?

Barnet Council has had two years of unremitting bad press as a result of policies that were not declared to the public during the 2010 election. Now the people have spoken, and we the undersigned believe that you have no choice but to listen and to change course.

Signed:

Derek Dishman
John Dix
Vicki Morris
Theresa Musgrove
Roger Tichborne

Democracy has odd features - listen up in postcode N20

Here in Barnet we have a Cabinet Member for the Environment whose decisions on parks, parking and the roads have repercussions for the entire population and the businesses of Barnet.

Mr Mustard is of course referring to Brian Coleman, a councillor in Totteridge ward.

Brian has increased parking charges by a percentage that was way in excess of inflation last year with some charges increasing by 300% from £1 to £4.

Brian has also made it more difficult to pay the parking charges with pay-by-phone, the introduction of which was bulldozed into place. Perfectly usable parking meters have been scrapped. At the very least they could have been retained in car parks.

Now Brian is reviewing all pelican crossings which the old and disabled find very helpful. The details are here.

Brian also wants despite vehement majority opposition to rent public parks out for private functions.

Mr Mustard could list lots more unpopular decisions that Brian has made but it is easier to refer you to John Baldy's website which lists 101 reasons to sack Brian Coleman.

Now as Mr Mustard does not live in Totteridge Ward but in Chipping Barnet he never had the chance to vote for Brian but is stuck with him all the same.

There are, according to the council's 2011 State of the Borough report ( in a right state ) 349,800 residents in Barnet. There must therefore be something in the range of 275,000 to 300,000 voters. How many people in Totteridge voted Brian into power. Just 3,705 and thanks to the spineless other elected councillors he gets a top job and goes power crazy. This is an odd feature of democracy. 

Mr Mustard thinks there must be a better way.

Whilst on the subject of Brian he is also up for re-election to the London Assembly, where he represents Barnet & Camden, and voting is on Thursday 3rd May. Mr Mustard will not be voting for Brian which means that to do the maximum damage to Brian's chances he has to vote for the former MP Andrew Dismore, Labour. If you did the same Brian's power base would be greatly reduced. He would then be just another local councillor and maybe the "leader" Richard Cornelius, who has recently shown a tiny glimpse of backbone ( crossed out "working with councillors" and substituted "working for councillors" in a document that the officers wrote ) will be brave enough to have a reshuffle of his team.

Ken or Boris - the choice is yours (there are other candidates apparently!). Mr Mustard will be using his second preference for the Green Party.

Just let's rid ourselves of Brian locally.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Democracy - an open letter to Barnet residents

Barnet Council on the Brink
The MetPro scandal, exposed by Barnet Bloggers, was a shocking case of incompetence and poor practice that continued over a period of several years. It placed vulnerable people at risk but it took local residents only a few weeks to uncover the problems. On Friday 4 November an equally serious issue was uncovered, again by a Barnet Blogger; an issue that runs to the very heart of democracy in Barnet and in Britain.

On 16 May this year Barnet Council applied to the Information Commissioner’s Office to complain about one particular blogger, to question whether they should be registered under the Data Protection Act and to ask if they had breached the act. The Information Commissioner’s website suggests that if such a situation exists you should “First, tell the organisation concerned and give it an opportunity to put things right. Many data protection problems can be solved quickly without us getting involved”. Did Barnet Council inform the blogger concerned? No, it simply submitted the complaint.

On 7 June the Information Commissioner’s Office responded that it did not consider that a blogger should be registered as a data controller and had therefore not breached the Data Protection Act. For most organisations that would have been sufficient and they would have left the matter there. Not Barnet Council. They responded on 23 June citing a European Court of Justice judgement, not something which just comes immediately to hand. Appealing a decision of the Information Commissioner’s Office is not a step taken lightly. Taking this action must have required approval from someone very senior at Barnet Council and possibly involved taking legal advice.

The Information Commissioner’s Office responded to Barnet Council on 11 July again rejecting the Council’s complaint. It went on to say in its reply:

“The balance of privacy versus freedom of expression relies on taking a proportionate approach. Requiring all bloggers to register with this office (ICO) and comply with the parts of the DPA exempted under Section 36 would, in our view, have a hugely disproportionate impact on freedom of expression”.

This incident comes on top of changes to the borough’s constitution limiting debate in Council meetings, imposing draconian new rules for residents forums and disbanding the only committee able to scrutinise the One Barnet programme.

For all that Eric Pickles, the Secretary of State for Communities, talks about the need for armchair auditors, the reality is that local councils, and in this case a solidly Conservative Council, see them as a nuisance and something to be disarmed at all costs. The fact that a local authority should have worked so hard to stop citizens exercising their legal right to ask questions should be something of great concern to every single voter in Barnet.

Over the last few years the Council has looked increasingly out of touch with the community in which we all live. In recent months this tendency has escalated. A much more strident approach has been adopted by the most senior managers and cabinet members, an approach which is becoming unsustainable. The Bloggers of Barnet recognise that there are thousands of hard working council staff struggling to deliver good quality service whilst under immense pressure to cut costs and worrying whether their jobs are about to be privatised or deleted altogether. These people deserve our praise and recognition. It is the very top layer, the officers and consultants on six figure salaries and the Cabinet elite that work with them, that are the problem.

We call upon the Council leader to pause for reflection, for councillors to re-engage with their residents, and senior officers and councillors to start listening to citizens. This should include:

· The Council setting out in a public document fully and clearly what the One Barnet programme means for residents;
· Publishing all currently secret One Barnet reports;
· Allowing in-house team bids for all services;
· Stop putting out false information about bloggers; and
· Relax the rules and allow residents to ask any questions they like at the Residents Forums.

Failure to do so will lead to a Council that is completely isolated from the majority of residents in Barnet and one that ultimately will fail.

Signed

Derek Dishman
John Dix
Vicki Morris
Theresa Musgrove
Roger Tichborne

An invitation to Councillor John Thomas from the Famous Five

The Famous Five Barnet Bloggers have Plenty of Fun with the democratic processes of consultation and community engagement.

Barnet bloggers look forward to meeting Cllr Thomas to discuss Barnet Council’s priorities.

---

Dear Councillor Thomas

We, bloggers of Barnet, are most pleased that in your recent YouTube broadcast you express yourself keen to engage with local residents and discuss ways to improve Barnet.

As you are no doubt aware, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Eric Pickles MP recently commended the bloggers of Barnet for their great work exposing the MetPro scandal. The subsequent investigation has highlighted all manner of problems with Barnet Council's procurement procedures which we are promised will now be rectified.

Since we are all motivated by the desire to help you improve Barnet still further, we are pleased to invite you for a live, televised discussion, to be broadcast on www.GotSeeN.com, at a time to suit you.

We are sure that there are many subjects about which we could have an interesting and informative discussion.

As public spirited citizens we are willing to meet all the costs of staging this event and broadcasting it live on the internet. We also guarantee to afford it maximum publicity and coverage through our blogs.

We are happy to discuss any topic and suggest that if you let us know in advance the topics you want to cover, we will do our homework so as to ensure a fruitful discussion.

We would be happy to broadcast either from the Barnet Council offices at North London Business Park or a venue chosen by us.

Subjects we think you might be interested to discuss are: One Barnet, Cabinet Members’ allowances, executive pay, waste within the council, the number of highly paid contractors working for Barnet, cost overruns on projects such as Aerodrome Road, CPZ charges, Icelandic investments, over-development and the strain it puts on infrastructure.

We look forward to hearing your response.

Best wishes

Derek Dishman

John Dix

Vicki Morris

Theresa Musgrove

Roger Tichborne

---

Alternative Residents Forum, Cypriot Centre, Britannia Road, N12, 7pm Tues

The Arts Centre - An awful venue is just right for the Residents Forum

Mr & Mrs Mustard went to the forum, apparently, but this was news to both parties and could lead to a bigamy charge but more of that later.

Mr Mustard had not been to the All Saints Arts Centre before and was looking forward to it. He had visions of it being like the Old Bull Theatre but more modern somehow. This is what it says about the Arts Centre on their website:

The Arts Centre is situated in All Saints' Church Hall and was converted to Arts use in the 1980s. With a capacity of 365 the large hall...

and this,

Theatrespace
Proscenium arch. Performing area 7.23m x 7m. For dance, the Theatrespace has an interior sprung floor and there is a reversible Harlequin floor that can be used here or in the Studio. The Theatrespace seats a maximum of 365, raked. Height to ceiling 6.1m - tab track, and black / brown reversible cyclorama. Lighting is available, with a Zero 88:24 board, 2 x 30A single phase supplies, 5 spots, and 20 fresnels.
Studio
The Studio space is suitable for use as dressing rooms for the Theatrespace or for small events in its own right. The performing area is variable, up to 6.71m x 3.66m, with the height to the apex of the ceiling 7.62m. Floor, wood no rake. Seats 50.

There were no photographs on the website which is unusual. Mr Mustard found out why. The parts he saw were a ghastly hovel. Now Mr Mustard knows that it isn't the venue that makes the people

Mr Mustard had a busy evening planned. He didn't really want to be too long at the forum but the timetable went awry from the off. Mr Mustard likes to be on time. He was 20 minutes early. A couple of confused looking council officers were wandering about. They wandered into the church hall and found that the regular weekly Taekwondo class was in progress; they probably thought about staying there as being the soft option, rather than facing a rabble of rebellious residents but they did reappear and found some chairs and set up some tiny uncomfortable chairs in a filthy, dark ( no-one knew where the light switch was ) junk filled room. Mr Mustard thinks that it was in fact the studio space. ( Trading Standards need to pop round and consider whether the Trade Descriptions Act has been broken )

This lady was wandering round in the car park looking lost 

please imagine her wearing red, as she was

and was a bit flustered and saying that she didn't think much of this venue.

Now the next time Mr Mustard saw this lady she was sat on the "top table" ( trestle table actually but let's not be too picky ) and it turned out that she is Cllr Kate Salinger. Mr Mustard accepts that you were disgusted by the venue councillor, as you don't normally hold your meetings quite so close to the gent's urinal, but what the episode told Mr Mustard, and what Mr Reasonable was to complain about later in respect of the sudden closure of leisure facilities in Barnet, is that no-one has done their homework & there has been no forward planning. There cannot have been an equalities assessment carried out. 

By the way Reverend Benjamin there is a trolley from Tesco's round the back of your hall ( among loads of junk that we had to walk past ) that someone has confiscated. Don't you think that their property should be returned to them?

Cllr Salinger is now going off to check the Arkley Village Hall. Save the petrol councillor, just take a look at their website, it looks fine. The only bit that isn't fine with Mr Mustard is that it will cost a minimum of £120 to hire and if there are council buildings that are in effect free then they should be used whenever possible.

The meeting was a little late in starting and a number of people had gone home again as they had better things to do than to wander around a site that houses a church, a school and a church hall trying to find a meeting. 

To the meeting. Cllr Salinger starts well. She apologises for the venue and says we will not be here again ( she didn't say "lessons have been learnt" but that was the gist of it just like on MetPro and the whole question of procurement - it really is not an appealing argument ) but she is prepared to carry on. Carry On at the Forum - the carry on capers actually get the tone of the forums about right. 

Then she reads out the rules for at least 3 minutes. Is it the exercise of democracy to put your residents into a straitjacket councillor? 

A well known activist Julian Silverman then tried to hijack the meeting by saying he wanted to debate stopping One Barnet. Cllr Salinger wasn't having any of that and she attacked ( in a very gentle manner! that famous phrase "like being savaged by a dead sheep" came to mind ) and said it was not for us to decide about One Barnet ( did she mean us the councillors or us the forum on behalf of the residents - no matter - we have no say on One Barnet, never have had a say ad never will have a say - well not until the ballot box comes around again in 2014 ). He could have a private meeting outside and she told him he shouldn't be here as he didn't live in Chipping Barnet ( Mr Mustard would have objected to his ejection, although crammed into the tiny space that we were it would have been like the keystone cops trying to get him out, as the Residents Forums are a public meeting ) and she finished by saying if you don't like the rules to take it up with the Council Leader. I wonder how his deaf ear is today?

On to the business. Handouts were provided of petitions and questions raised. The column was headed "Issue raised" Mr Mustard really does not like the word "issue" - if the list contains questions and petitions why not say so?

Item 1 - Residents of Sellwood Drive don't want to get parking tickets for parking on the pavement. It looks like they aren't going to be ticketed in the future.

#2 - Residents of Milton Avenue want the CPZ extending down their road just for 1 hour per day. They would be delighted to pay £100 each for the pleasure. Be careful what you wish for in Milton Avenue. Next year, unless the judicial review is succesful, the charge might be £250 or £500, whatever number Brian thinks is a good one. This will take months or years to study and implement. However, as was observed, the free bays were taken away overnight. The council can move fast when it suits them. What a cynic was in the audience that night.

#3 - A long debate about taking away the light controlled crossing for pedestrians at the junction of Oakleigh Rd North and the High Rd where the lights are still bagged over which was contrasted with the similar lights on the other side of the High Rd in Totteridge Lane where the lights have been again turned on follwoing intervention by the ward member there. Oh dear, one rule for Totteridge and another one for other wards. Of course that junction does need lights for pedestrians.

#4 - Mr Reasonable complained about QE Girls School lesiure facilities closing with no notice. Cllr Salinger said that was because it was now an academy ( and so has escaped the control of Barnet Council ). Mr R understood that perfectly and pointed out the lack of forward planning., the lousy reputation of Barnet Council for leisure, the lack of public leisure facilities in Barnet, and that things were utterlu unacceptable. Cllr Salinger could do no more than "hope" that access could be arranged. Bob Hope or no hope?

You are wrong Mr R about Barnet being appalling at leaisure - they always make full use of the spa facilities at the Sandbanks Hotel on the teachers' conferences. And the swimming pool, and the beach, and the bar and the fine restaurant.

#5 - Mr R again asking when PayPoint would be ready for use. Another public flogging for the poor Highways Manager, who has had to suffer a drastic cut in the size of his team and still do the same amount of work, and the flogging should probably have gone to the Parking Manager ( not there ) and the legal officer. Lambasted for going off half-cocked and lack of advance planning. PayPoint from October but don't hold your breath.

#5.5 - Mr R asked about his missing question which ahd not been listed because it was said to breach the constitution. Mr R has read the constituion several times and can quoyte from it at will. The councillor has had 3 lots of advice and as they conflict she is going to get a fourth opinion. That will help? Cllr Salinger is going to write to Mr R with an explanation. Then Mr R attacked the badly drafted constituiton and Cllr Salinger agreed ( she didn't say what steps she had taken to improve it though ).

There was then some discussion, started by the lady sitting on my left, Mrs Angry, about the whole structure of the forums. Now this was a complete political hot potato and so having been on a course entitled "Take the Chair" run by Successful Speeches ( Cllr Longstaff wasn't on this course ) Cllr Salinger decided to accuse Mrs Angry of being married to Mr Mustard ( except that she had no idea who either of them were ) and once suitable protestations of innocence ( well at least in that matter ) had been made we got away from our non-marital differences back to the matter in hand. Cllr Longstaff was invited to say a few words and they were "Shut up & listen" - is he in the right job. His apology wasn't very gracious either. Someone will stick the golden boot in one day.

Mr Reasonable stuck his in and pointed out that councillors had ignored the advice from officers about forum structure. Doh. Dr Hines asked how if forums related to just one subject they could possibly deal with cross-cutting matters? They can't and there wasn't an answer. Actually there as an answer, it was "no idea". She is honest is Cllr Salinger. Someone else suggested better webspace for forums. The whoe, site is being rewritten at present which is long overdue and doubtless very expensive. After 10 minutes about democracy we moved on to street lighting which both Mr & Mrs Angry-Mustard are keen on. I'll meet you under the usual lampost tonight Mrs A? pretenting to get your cat down.


#6 -We then had a sensible if somewhat hard to follow talk by the Highways Manager about how not replacing lampposts to save money and then replacing the very same lampposts would not cost anything? Mr Mustard might be in need of another thousand pieces of paper to be convinced about this one. Barnet Council are going to spend £4.9m on energy saving devices to dim or turn off street lights and save £200,000 to maybe £400,000 a year. So breakeven could be 25 years away?

A widow who lived in a cul-de-sac was rightly concerned that the lights would be turned off and it would be unsafe for her to get home at night. Although Enfield Council experimented with turning off some street lights and dimming others they will not be turned off in Barnet, period ( remember you read it here first ). That is until they are of course! The answer is to keep an eye on your streetlights and if they are too dim for your liking to complain to the council.

#7 - Yellow lines to be painted on the corners of Pulle, Calvert & Sebright roads so that the road does not get blocked by parked cars. The problem supposedly is that this will, according to Cllr Longstaffe, take away quite a lot of parking. What nobody thought about, or doesn't know, is that the Highway Code says not to park within 10m of a junction. Safety and access should come before parking. It seems that Cllr Bridget Perry lives in one of these roads and another resident said she is "very anti-everything going on". Great. Clrr Salinger banged it off to the environment sub-cimmitte. No messing.

#8 - Same roads and they want to park on the pavement. A bad idea as it ruins the pavement and you couldn't get a pram or a wheelchair down there. The pavements are very narrow. If you keep pushing for a CPZ down there it will probably end up with you only being able to park on one side of the road but at least ambulances and fire engines will be able to get through which is surely worth the cost of losing some parking spaces? You have purchased houses in a narrow street; it really can't be made any wider than it is.

#9 - Parking in St Albans Rd. This "A" road just outside High Barnet is now getting parked up for hundreds of metres because of the huge increase in parking charges. You can't blame people for parking for free although there are safer suggestions on this blog as to where to aprk for less or for free.

Updates from the previous meeting

Item 1 - Residents want a yellow line outside Barnes Court. No-one had turned up to speak about their question and the answer was "Bollards".

#2 - Monkfirth School want their lollipop team back. The school can have it. They simply have to organise and pay for it.

#3 - A petition to save Friern Barnet Library. The resident who orgainised the petition of 1739 signatures is talking to councillors and Cllr Salinger was delighted about this. To Mr Mustard's mind this is all wrong. We have local councils so that services can be provided in a hopefully cost effective manner for the good of all and paid for by all ( subject to ability to pay ) and to take on work as a volunteer on behalf of the council is to in effect carry out the duties of a librarian and possibly deprive a qualified person of work. If we can perhaps volunteer to do any of the council jobs then the famous five Barnet bloggers would like to share the posts of Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer between them.

#4 - The safety issue near Friern Barnet Town Hall where schoolchildren do what they do which is to run into the road to catch the bus. It will be years before it gets resolved.

#5 - Please resurface my road and the applicant was not there so we moved swiftly on.

#6 - Residents inbetween Friern Barnet Rd & Colney Hatch Lane have carried out their own traffic survey to prove that their roads are a rat run. Are they near Tesco's Mrs Angry? Once the North Circular is finished ( Mr Musatrd has seen the works on that road continue for over 20 years already ) this will be looked at.

#7 - ASBO behaviour. What are the council doing. Mr Mustard had his pseudo wife Mrs Angry next to him and she is Barnet's leading authority on this subject. Instead we had to listen to a rambling and almost content-less speech from Cllr Longstaff about the 3 year strategy of the multi agency panel as if that would be of any help tomorrow when you are afraid to come out of your home. Perhaps every councillor should be made to go and live for a week on an estate chosen by their electorate to see if they think differently afterwards about Barnet's estates and whether something needs doing today about the problems. 

#8/9 - Speeding. Barnet Council are working closely with the police who apparently cannot afford to calibrate their speed gun except, by some strange quirk of fate, in Totteridge Ward. 

The meeting was over.  Hurrah. Then Julian Silverman told everyone that the next meeting was at the Greek-Cyprio Centre in Britannia Rd N12 on 4 October at 7pm and you can ask what you like and have an unrestricted discussion. Cllr Salinger looked really confused at this point and turned for guidance to the democratic services officer on her left for guidance but none was forthcoming. that's because it's the alternative residents forum clouncillor. You really should keep your ear closer to the ground. It has been organised by the Barnet Alliance for Public Services as they want to debate One Barnet and other matters. You are welcome to go along and see what it is about. Mr Mustard hopes to.. It is nothign to do with Mr Mustard who is compeletly independent of any organisation and has his own agenda.

And then thank goodness at about 7.30 we all went home. Mrs Angry to hers and Mr Mustard to his, honest.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Gravy train - column 4 of 8

So the column of the Corporate Structure Chart that we are going to look at today is column 4 - "Corporate Governance". This carriage of the train holds 95 people - yes Mr Mustard does agree that it is somewhat overcrowded in there and it puts out lots of smoke and has mirrored walls. The carriage is beautifully decorated on the outside and is named "transparency & democracy"  but somehow no information ever comes out of the carriage. There is no lighting; it travels completely in the dark. Transparency & Democracy has rarely been glimpsed on the railway tracks of Barnet although you hear it talked about all of the time.

The chief conductor in this carriage is Jeff Lustig. He is rather grandly titled the Director of Corporate Governance. He gets £132,480 p.a. for trying to keep the train on the rails. The present section of track is extremely bumpy but that won't bother Mr Lustig. He had trouble with a piece of land on the sloped section that is Underhill I'm told but others can comment on that.He is also a stickler for making the train run on time. The special Audit train was being driven by Lord Palmer last month, oh what fun he had, and Lord Palmer wanted to stop and pick up a few more poor parishioners but Mr Lustig wouldn't have it; we've been 30 minutes at that stop and not a minute more. Lord Palmer is a sport though and he drove off very slowly so a few more passengers got aboard although some were still left behind on the platform. Despite buying a ticket for the train they were not allowed on board; it's no way to run a railway.

There are 3 assistant conductors.

Margaret Martinus must be very busy waving flags at everyone as she is the "Assistant Director - Legal" and there is lots of squabbling between train officials and just about everyone else. She also signed the recycling contract which I will soon enlighten you about. You might want to recycle Corporate Governance afterwards. Ms Martinus is paid £99,555 p.a.

Ms Aysen Giritli is the "Acting Head of Democratic Services" according to the corporate structure chart or the "Democratic Services Manager" according to the unaudited Accounts; now you know how it feels to be caught with the wrong type of ticket on the train although you thought you had the right one. Don't go getting in the first class carriage now Ms Giritli when you only have a second class ticket and a third class employer. Mind you, on £72,048 p.a. you can afford to travel first class wherever you go.

The third assistant conductor, are we on Indian Railways all of a sudden ?, is Sian Hughes, the "Head of Governance and Service Development" ( Mr Mustard has an idea - in the future no-one can have a job title which has more letters in it than in their name - that would make things simpler ) . She has been on this train for a while working her way up through the ranks. She now earns £72,048 p.a.

So there we have it. To run this shining beacon of this miscarriage of democracy costs £376,131 p.a. and it won't be long before Mr Mustard has checked out the ticket classes of all the other travellers and can give you the total annual spend.

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Residents' forums - a.k.a. Shut up and sit down.

Mr Mustard must firstly apologise to his readers that he has neglected his duties in the last week. He left the mustard alone but had rather too much sauce, red & brown ( beer after wine and you'll feel fine just is not true, mind you there is no mention of quantity ! ) and so at 5pm when he should have been thinking of firing up the motorbike and blasting, MetPro style, on his high powered motorbike at 30mph to Coppetts Wood Primary School for the residents' forum he was instead "sniffing the pillow" as the custom is in Poland apparently.

Having read the other bloggers' reports & the local papers Mr Mustard finds that he made the same contribution to democracy in Barnet that evening as did the Councillors and Officers who were on the top table at the Residents' Forum i.e. none at all.

Mr Mustard had not been idle however. Back in April he saw which way the wind was blowing and as it is a democracy Mr Mustard sometimes manages to find the time in his busy schedule to send helpful letters to Councillors and Officers to let them know how one Council Tax Payer is thinking. 

( He wrote to the Chief Executive, Mr Nick Walkley, once saying that Barnet Council could usefully join the Plain English Campaign and didn't get a reply. Mr Mustard was relieved as the answer would probably have been interminably long and he wouldn't have known at the end whether non-stick Nick was in favour of the Plain English Campaign or not - he suspects not, having heard him holding forth at the Audit Committee. You set out a long list of items that could have been to blame Mr Walkley - you forgot at least one - yourself; please remember at the next crisis that you are in charge and occasionally that means saying that something was your fault. You will find it quite refreshing if you try it. )

Anyway before the meeting of 14 April of the Special Committee (Constitution Review Meeting ) Mr Mustard took the trouble to write to all of the participants with his thoughts. This is what he wrote:-

Dear Sir / Madam

I note that you will also consider the future format of Residents' Forums tomorrow evening.

I have read the relevant papers. I agree that the current format could be improved.

I am shocked. There are 331,000 residents in the borough and you are asked to base your decision on Appendix C which is the result of two 90 minute focus groups with just 16 residents.

This is simply not enough residents to consult. You don't get a proper view of things by asking 16 residents especially amongst 16 of whom it was said "There was very little awareness of Resident (sic) Forums" .

You haven't consulted residents who actually attend the meetings ( and you know who they are as an attendance register is signed  ) you don't seem to have consulted bodies such as the Barnet Residents Association and or any bloggers ?

I think that Residents' Forums do need to be radically changed and that you have not considered a much better way of doing things which would truly be democratic.

I think that the issues that bother people are either local ones that may only affect a few people or major ones that affect the whole Borough or a sizeable minority of residents.

Lets take out the small local issues first. They should simply be dealt with locally by ward Councillors.

Only major issues should be discussed at a monthly borough wide Residents' Forum. The poster for the last meeting is attached " It's your meeting. You can put questions, debate items and set the agenda ". That's not a description of the meeting that I recognise.

My proposal

So here is my proposal. If it truly is the Residents' meeting then let the residents run it; they can organise their own Residents' Council ( with individuals from organisations such as the Barnet Residents Association, The Barnet Society, Friends of Barnet Market and others from across the whole Borough ) set their own agenda and invite the Councillors and Officers that they wish to hear from. A monthly meeting, held in suitable Council premises, which would only cover the 2 or 3 most important issues ongoing in the Borough at that moment.

This would be more cost effective than any of the other proposed changes, requiring only 12 meetings a year and very little cost .

I do hope that you will add this proposal to the ideas being considered.

Please note that I am only interested in attending as an ordinary resident. I am not interested in sitting on any committees ( or in becoming a Councillor !)

Yours sincerely

Mr Mustard

To whom did Mr Mustard send this useful advice; to all the Councillors sitting at the meeting of 14 April or on the reserve list, and the Officers whose names were on the report that was going to be discussed, as follows :-

cllr.d.longstaff
cllr.w.prentice
cllr.b.perry
cllr.a.finn
cllr.j.scannell ( email deleted unread )
cllr.j.cohen ( a polite thank you received from Cllr Cohen )
cllr.r.cornelius
cllr.t.davey
cllr.a.harper
cllr.a.moore
cllr.b.rawlings
cllr.a.schneiderman

jeff.lustig@barnet.gov.uk
aysen.giritli@barnet.gov.uk
jeremy.williams@barnet.gov.uk

So there we have it; what Mr Mustard thought was a thoughtful and well thought out idea to increase democracy merited one thank you from a Councillor who was unable to be at the meeting ( and he did pass on the email to his substitute ) one copy deleted unread and absolutely no response from everyone else. Mr Mustard would not have minded if they had all written back picking holes in his idea; that would be constructive debate and an outing for democracy. Well Councillors, you have now seen what happens when you try to stifle simple questions which residents would like an answer to. At the new style forums, see Mr Reasonables' blog,

here

or Mrs Angry's blog, about Swinging in Barnet

here

If that was not what you expected I expect you can find the wife swapping site if you just google it; if there is a Councillor swapping site lead me to it, I'd like to swap mine for something useful like a Swiss Army knife for getting stones out of horses hooves, or a bottle opener ( maybe not as I'm only now sober )

So Councillors next time Mr Mustard writes to you, and he is even busier than you are so back off on the self importance please, why not take the trouble to reply with one or two lines picking holes in his argument, assuming you can think of any. Please be aware, if you use numbers, they will be thoroughly checked.

And the bad news is that you are not going to get away with cancelling democracy; the real Residents' Forums will start later in 2011. 

Yours frugally

Mr Mustard

Full Council Meeting - 12 April 2011 - more BarnetOneSpeak translations

Here are some more of the questions and answers from the Full Council Meeting of Tuesday evening, before democracy was dealt a further blow this evening in no uncertain terms:-

Question 8                                                                                                     Councillor Kath McGuirk

Would the Cabinet Member confirm if there are any areas which benefit from a free initial period on pay and display in Barnet?

Answer by Councillor Brian Coleman

There are two areas that benefit from a free initial period of 30 minutes. The first is Mowbray Parade in Edgware HA 8 and the second is Hampden Square N14. No other such schemes are envisaged and I am reviewing why we have these two.

Possible translation
There is a big hole in the budget and here is another idea in how to fill it. Local traders will suffer further misery but I've got a permit that lets me park anywhere or I take a taxi at your expense.

 Question 20                                                                                                  Councillor Alex Brodkin

Could the Leader advise if she will support the webcasting of council meetings, as well as a firm policy to enable the public to blog, tweet or otherwise record council meetings in future, and if not, why not?

Answer by Councillor Lynne Hillan, Leader of the Council

The decision not to allow filming in the Council Chamber was taken, not by this Administration, but by this Council. However, we are currently looking at the options and suggestions will be brought back to this Council for full debate.

Possible translation
A1. That's a trick question which I won't answer directly. I suppose that we will have to do what Eric Pickles MP says in the end but in the meantime we will just have to look stupid and then quietly allow it when no-one is looking as if we agreed all along what a good idea it is..
A2. We will spend £250,000 on a web broadcast system that doesn't work very well and for which we forgot to sign a DPR.

Question 22                                                                                     Councillor Alan Schneiderman

Will the Leader confirm: a) what the latest position is regarding Barnet being granted priority status on frozen Icelandic deposits; b) what the financial risk is of not being granted priority status; and c) if the relevant risk reserve fully covers the Council in the event priority status is not granted?

Answer by Councillor Daniel Thomas

On 1^st April 2011, the Icelandic courts upheld the priority status of UK Local Authority deposits. This decision is subject to appeal. The budget report suggested that the cost of non-priority

status would be approximately £14m and this is the sum that we are building up in the risk reserve for 2011/12.

Possible translation

That's £14m up the swanny that could have been spent on maintaining front line services.

Question 24                                                                                                  Councillor Alison Moore

Would the Cabinet Member confirm what the status is of the implementation of the new revenues and benefits system?

Answer by Councillor Daniel Thomas

The new system went live on 18.2.11, it then had to close down for another week in order to recast benefits and set up the 2011/12 billings etc. The system came back on line 14.3.11. We are working with the various partner organisations to clear the issues that inevitably occur with a complete change of systems.
Possible translation

Other Councils have managed to change their systems at short notice without great problems but this is OneBarnet where things are different ( and not better ). Your guess is as good as mine as to when all Council Tax bills will be correct.

Question 28                                                                                                  Councillor Claire Farrier

Would the Cabinet Member please confirm that there is an agreement with out of borough allotment holders, that they pay the same charge for allotments in Barnet as Barnet residents. Would he please confirm the date of this agreement, and that it has not been rescinded.

Answer by Councillor Brian Coleman

The new charges for allotments which will be in effect from the 1^st April 2012 include an increased charge for non-Barnet residents. This in line with charges for other services in the borough where residents are charged less than non-residents. I think it is right and proper that Barnet Council tax payers should receive a better deal on allotments than those residents of other Boroughs whose authorities have often sold their allotments for development.
Possible translation
I have increased rents for residents from £6 to £17 per pole and for non-residents, who might just happen to have moved to Potters Bar to retire and kept the allotment they have worked on for 40 years, from £12 to £34 per pole. That will teach them not to be disloyal and move out of Barnet. This is OneBarnet you know. They should have put their name on the 5 year waiting list at their new abode 5 years ago when no-one wanted an allotment and before they knew they were moving.

Question 31                                                                                                  Councillor Alison Moore

Would the Cabinet Member confirm exactly how much money has been lost to the Council as a result of the failure to advertise the correct charges in statutory notices about parking charge increases?

Answer by Councillor Brian Coleman

It is estimated that £93,000 of income will not be achieved due to the delay. The service will need to recover this sum through other efficiencies during the coming year.
Possible translation

We will issue another 930 parking tickets during the year, but none of them to Councillors with their free permits for every zone.

Question 32                                                                                                  Councillor Kath McGuirk

Following the government announcement that Barnet will receive around £420,000 towards the pothole fund, will the Cabinet Member confirm that he will reduce the proposed parking charge increases in proportion?

Answer by Councillor Brian Coleman

No, because the Government’s grant on potholes ( four times greater than that given to us by the last Labour Government) is an entirely separate matter to the need to return the Special Parking Account to the budgeted surplus.

Possible translation
Brilliant I can stuff CPZ residents for extra money and get some of it from the government as well. Double bubble.

Question 39                                                                                                 Councillor Alison Moore

Will the Leader confirm that speaking rights for all councillors at Council will be maintained?

Answer by Councillor Lynne Hillan, Leader of the Council

No. The Special Committee (Constitution Review) is currently considering council procedure rules on the rights of speakers and we await their recommendations.

Possible translation
All Councillors are equal. Some are more equal than others. Oink. ( see Mrs Angry's and Mr Reasonable's blogs on this subject shortly. I have to confess that being in the pub and coming second in the quiz was possibly a better use of time than sitting though yet another council meeting this evening about the Constitution - and boy do you need a strong constitution for Barnet Council meetings  )

Question 40                                                                                                 Councillor Alison Moore

Does the Cabinet Member’s publicly stated prejudice towards the private sector compromise the integrity of the options appraisal process in the One Barnet programme?

Answer by Councillor Robert Rams  
No

Possible translation
Call the fire brigade as my pants seem to be on fire.

Yours frugally ( with tongue only slightly in cheek )



Mr Mustard