The Year The Town Hall Shrank

The recent BBC4 documentary series this month on Stoke-on-Trent CityCouncil was filmed over a considerable period in 2010-11 by Blast! Films and clearly the local nature of this deserves comment from local bloggers such as myself.

To put my comments in context I will state where I am politically, which is political but not party political. Referring to parties of relevance to Stoke-on-Trent and this documentary, I have never voted for the Conservatives or British National Party. I have in the past, to my shame perhaps, voted Labour and Liberal Democrat. I currently have a preference for independents (although clearly will not like all of them or agree with everything they do) and voted for the Hanford and Trentham independent councillors in the 2011 local election.

I have to say I was a little surprised about the focus of the documentary, mainly on the cuts and on specific cuts. Clearly they will have filmed many hours of footage and had to select from that quite severely to fit it into a 3 hour mini-series. But I suppose I expected a rather wider coverage and certainly more depth than appeared.

I did get the impression that some of the worst aspects of our city and our councillors, of all parties including Labour and the BNP and even independent councillors, were shown.

The 'democratic' process

There was a lot that the documentary didn't say. I have mentioned some of these things in a previous blog relating to the relationship between local and central government. A key issue here has been the use (and abuse in my opinion), by Labour, of the Local Government Act 2000  which was used to impose an unelected board to interfere in our city, take away our system of election by thirds contrary even to a local council vote and inflict ward boundary changes on us. So now we can only hold our councillors to account once every 4 years instead of annually 3 years out of 4. The documentary focused on the 2011 local council election but didn't put it in this context very well. Furthermore it did not mention the outrageous curtailing of the terms of 20 of our councillors, who were elected for 4 years which was then cut down to 3. This is unfair and undemocratic both to the elected councillors concerned who had been lied to about the time they would serve and to the electorate who voted for them to give them a 4 year mandate.  I know there were people interviewed who would have talked sensibly about these deeper issues of democracy, but their interviews were not included.

The documentary included the time just prior to the 2011 election when we had 60 councillors in 3 member wards and a very politically mixed cabinet including members from the 3 largest parties/groupings; Labour, City Independents, Conservative and Independent Alliance, but notably also a Liberal Democrat but not members of the larger British National Party and Community Voice groups. (It is worth pointing out that independent councillors often form groups for pragmatic reasons because the council is structured that way but are not whipped in the same way as political parties.) The cabinet was led by Mohammed Pervez from the largest group, Labour, who remains the leader of the current 44 member council, 33 of whom are Labour.

The filming showed some of the worst antics of the councillors, such as Debra Gratton looking really out of her depth and just saying how difficult things were and Mohammed Pervez being advised by media man Dan Barton (who has since left the council) along with other council officers, but with his blank look, appearing as if it was all washing over him. He used that phrase “we are where we are” which I hate and which is overused by some councillors to try to 'justify' any further stupid decisions they want to make. The documentary stated that Pervez is paid £44,000 per year for his council role and that he also has a full time job as a research scientist, so I would imagine there is little time to get to grips with council matters. Peter Kent-Baguley and Brian Ward were seen in heated argument and Terry Follows was seen being vocally rather aggressive towards Barbara Beeston. Mike Coleman made an inadvisable comment about muslims and what they wear that I had better not repeat (in the 'retweeting' debate this doesn't have to mean agreement in my view, just that you want to alert others to what someone else has said). Terry Follows and Denver Tolley were both shown using the scare tactic that if they don't do what 'government' wants they will come in and take over. But in Denver's case, as Labour, they actually brought the government in when it suited them. Besides, there is a lot the council does that isn't driven by government, the deeply unpopular move of the civic centre from Stoke to Hanley, squandering our money and plunging us into further debt whilst cutting valued services, being just one example.

In terms of the election itself the documentary reports Labour and anti-fascist groups “campaigning together”. Now I understand that there are very strict rules regarding election campaigns and campaign expenses and who is officially supporting whom and who is campaigning independently of whom, which clearly need to be adhered to!

I was astounded recently when it was reported in the local press that the council are squandering yet more of our money on spin! The article states that “Mohammed Pervez told The Sentinel he would review the authority's 'communication strategy' after seeing his party lose the Springfields and Trent Vale by-election to the City Independents in July”. The way that reads rather implies that our council tax payers money is being used to boost the image of “his party” - Labour. That cannot be right. I recommend reading the remarks made by former councillor John Davis (no relation) in this article, I have to say I totally agree with him on this.

BNP candidate Mickey White was interviewed, he wanted a future for his daughter and was frustrated at being unemployed with foreign migrants getting work. His concern for a good future for his child is one most of us parents share and his frustrations have some justification. Pervez has even stated at council that a rise in the city's population is due to EU migrants as well as birth rate.

Mike Coleman was interviewed talking about a well motivated, very organised body of people. The filming here left this a little ambiguous though I speculate that he may have been referring to a community of Asian origin, but I wonder if he was also on some level wishing his own political party could be that well organised. The worst aspect of the protesters outside the civic centre on election night was also shown when Mike Coleman was spat on. Protest by all means but that sort of assault is unacceptable. Mike lost the plot when he lost the election and went on to be convicted of racially-aggravated harassment.  Resorting to law breaking is not the answer either. I believe the BNP are now finished in Stoke-on-Trent and maybe even further afield.

A most pertinent comment was made by a local voter, Dave, who said he votes differently in local elections than he does in general elections. Now that is something I would like to see more of, firstly someone who is willing to consider the issues and actually go out and vote and secondly someone who is willing to consider voting differently in different elections, depending on the issues involved. How he votes is obviously his choice but it would be good to see more people making considered decisions rather than blindly following a party by tradition or not even bothering to vote.

Cuts

Right at the start of this documentary series it is stated, correctly, that central government Conservative cuts are responsible for reducing local government funding, for 2011-12 this was an 8.09% cut for Stoke-on-Trent, amounting to £21.6million. (Of course Labour have openly stated that they would be cutting if they were in government as well, just not so fast.) But the documentary immediately goes on to say that the Labour led council is therefore going to 'save' £36million. So it's not all down to central government, much is down to local council poor choices and as independent councillor Dave Conway states, “bad management”. This is a council which pays its chief executive silly money and even then he needs an assistant also on silly money.

Amongst the cuts the documentary focuses on is the cut to children's centres and the successful battle led by Melissa Beydilli to keep these open, followed of course by cuts to the services offered at these centres. It was interesting that Mohammed Pervez telephoned Melissa to ask to 'help her' with her talk when she presented her >5000 signature petition against the closures to full council. Melissa spoke well about the importance of early provision for children, but the filming also revealed a worse side. She was dropped off at the civic centre in a car which parked on a double yellow line! After the children's centres were 'saved' and of course after Labour had won so many council seats in the 2011 election and introduced a Labour only cabinet, they proposed a 30% cut to the children's centres budget. This is when Melissa realised what they were really like - “conniving” and said the campaign had been “used and abused”. In the end the cut was negotiated down to 20%.

Various other areas cut were also mentioned including Shelton and Tunstall swimming pools. The shenanigans that go on with swimming pools in the city are incredible. I'm not even going to dare to go there in this blog.

Another strong focus of the documentary was the closure of council care homes, Eardley and in particular Heathside House. The residents seemed happy there and the carers did really seem to care. It was interesting listening to some of the residents. I had to chuckle during a quiz when icebergs came up, a resident said it was a lettuce. Alice was a very jovial character and fantasized amusingly about a luxury holiday. Mabel didn't hold back in having her say and reported that they weren't asked about whether they wanted the care home closed, they were just told. Pervez described the care homes as “poor quality”, which annoyed Gaynor, the manager of Heathside House. A resident's relative in a meeting with Pervez said it was “baloney” for him to talk about short term rehabilitation when people have dementia, complained of “no proper consultation” and accused the council of failure. It slipped out during the documentary that the strategic decision to close the care homes had been made a couple of years previously, not attributable to the Conservative government then. It was quite heart wrenching seeing the old folk moved out of Heathside House. Gaynor took redundancy. I wonder how the residents and former staff are doing now.

What infuriated me the most about the care home issue was Pervez talking about “choice” for elderly people. They had no choice! 'Choice' seems to be a term used by Labour when they are doing exactly the opposite and dictatorially imposing things on people. Shame on them!

Further comments on the cuts are given in a good letter toThe Sentinel by Alan Lear, which I have commented on.

And the result of the 24/2/11 budget and cuts:

For:- Lord Mayor Tolley, councillors Al-Khatib, Barber, B. Ali, Z. Ali, Bell, Bowers,

Brian, Bridges, Brown, Clarke, Daniels, J. Davis, M. Davis, Dillon, Follows, Fradley, Garner, Gratton, Hamer, Hassell, Irving, Iqbal, Khan, Knapper, Lyth, Matloob, Najmi, Pervez, Powell-Beckett, Reynolds, Rosenau, Ryan, Shotton, Smith, D. Walker, Ward, Wazir, Wilcox and Wright. (These are Labour, Conservative and Independent Alliance, City Independent, Liberal Democrat and Non-aligned councillors.)

Against:- Councillors Barnes, Baddeley, Batkin, Coleman, Conway, Burgess, Marfleet, E. Walker, Joynson, Kent-Baguley, Rigby, Salih and Sutton. (These are City Independent, British National Party, Community Voice, Liberal Democrat and Non-aligned Christian Independent councillors.)

Pervez talked about approving this “budget of £36million” and then needing to take out a further £28million. Note that he is not talking about a budget as I would know it, a plan for spend, he is focusing just on cuts. The 2011 local election followed this budget. It was pointed out in the documentary that this election provided in part for a judgement on the cuts so far and the cuts to come. It is noticeable that the electorate largely voted for parties and people inflicting the cuts and less so for those opposing the cuts. So in some sense the people of the city are getting what they collectively asked for.

Council tax

The documentary series highlighted the council's appalling record on collection of council tax, exposed by Dave Conway at a full council meeting. There were millions of pounds of council tax debts dating back to 1993! One council worker said people were given repeated chances despite having excuses like forgetting (for 10 years in one case), spending all their money on holiday and not treating paying the debt as a priority. Pathetic!  Some had been given repeated court summonses which they had ignored. One had £6,000 of debt just written off. People were shown with nice cars and large televisions but still not paying their council tax. The bailiff shown struggled to get anywhere as she could only seize possessions with the council's permission which they wouldn't give. There were just no proper repercussions if people didn't pay. The chief executive John van de Laarschot interviewed on this passed the buck to elected members, indicating that they need to decide policy on this.

Some of us, including myself, always pay our council tax and pay it on time. I don't have a problem with the concept of taxation and social responsibility and wish that others who can't be bothered to pay weren't so selfish. Many people on low incomes and benefits get much or all of their council tax paid for them. If this isn't sufficient then they should appeal to the council to do something about it, not just ignore it. I don't think council tax is a great tax, I would prefer a local income tax, but as I'm in a minority on this I have to put up and pay up. I hate the way this council squanders my money but given that others in the city have put this council into power I have to live with it. But I am outraged that this council lets irresponsible residents off, they really do need to be more hard line on this. They should clamp down promptly to stop people building up large debts which become more difficult to pay back and to deter people from trying to get away without paying.

Summary

I found Mohammed Pervez's smiles whilst inflicting the cuts disturbing, he said he had driven the whole budget process himself and even said he enjoyed it! He enthused about his political ambitions. He talked about applying Labour values, but if this is what today's Labour values are then I want none of it. This is the man the electorate of Moorcroft choose to keep in power and has so much power given to him by Labour voting electorate in other wards bolstering the number of Labour whipped councillors. Under our poor approximation to democracy we look destined to suffer under a Labour council until at least 2019. The 2015 general election will bring out extra Labour voters who will put their crosses in the local Labour boxes too. Until we get more electorate willing to turn out and vote on local issues and for sensible alternative candidates, we are stuck with a Labour council.

Meanwhile I continue to be an independent voter when I get the chance and possibly even an independent candidate at the next local election.

Stoke-on-Trent City Council Budget Meeting 23/2/12

I present here an account of the points I picked out from the Stoke-on-Trent City Council budget meeting on 23rd February 2012, which amazingly I did manage to get to and observe in person this time.  What was with the security on the door council?  They had been told not to let anyone in after the meeting started.  I do agree with a principle of punctuality but the council has to realise that despite the economic situation, some of us are actually still in employment and have work to do beforehand.   I was a couple of minutes late but it took some persistent persuasion to get in.  Council, you should do better than this, leave the back door open or let the public slip in at a convenient point in the proceedings and instruct security staff appropriately.  Once in, I found the public gallery was fairly full.  I give times from the webcast and some of my observations and views.

Cllr Mohammed Pervez (0:18:49) blamed the Tory LibDem government but said he was determined to cut year on year, £36million last year, £24million this year, towards a balanced budget by the end of the comprehensive spending review period.  Of course he claimed they have listened but is committed to privatisation schemes such as that of closing council run care homes.  He claimed not to be letting residents down!  He also stated that a vote against the budget is a vote against jobs in the city, which met with murmers of incredulity around the public gallery, seeing as they are making massive redundancies.  He did quote £400,000 being spent on economic development, marketing and promoting the city.  One of the things I object to is them squandering resources on promoting themselves in glossy publications etc.  He mentioned that the council is contributing £60million to BSF. 


Whilst there are some nice refurbishments, BSF has been a most shameful attack by the previous Labour government and our Labour council; scrapping community schools, closing schools and disrupting communities.  We had to fight tooth and nail to keep Trentham High School and were not supported by our Tory councillors at the time, who we subsequently booted out.  The Tories continue the attack on schools, forcing academies against the will of communities.  All this and there are still insufficient pupil places as I have reported.  I have emailed Cllr Debra Gratton twice now, requesting updated pupil projections, I have not yet received a reply.


Mohammed Pervez did make a couple of valid points though.  They are updating homes to reduce heat loss, this is indeed a sensible move.  Much better than some of the other things they have done such as flatten areas of the city and get their sums wrong in the decision to demolish rather than renovate.  The other thing he said is that people elected them, it’s a fair point, they did, they voted Labour in the city, they voted for these cuts.  I didn’t, I voted independent in Hanford and Trentham, but it’s a democracy and I live with the consequences of how the masses voted in other parts of the city.

Cllr Paul Breeze (0:35:10) is not one to hold back in expressing a view.  He said he couldn’t support the council tax rise and budget and said decades of Labour control and Labour MPs have not been good for the city.  He accused Labour of being arrogant dismissive intolerant control freaks, very accurate I think.  He also said they only listen when their backs are against the wall and reminded us how they deceived people over children’s  centres.  He quoted Mohammed Pervez from last year, election year, “we are going to freeze council tax to take advantage of the government initiative", "during these austere times it would be unreasonable to put an even  greater financial burden on the residents of Stoke-on-Trent".  This year council tax is being increased, obviously because this time it is not an election year.  Labour undemocratically and despicably took away our elections by thirds.  Paul Breeze is good to listen to, he is not one to be fooled by Labour.

Cllr Ann James (0:40:10) also spoke out well, criticising cutting adults and children’s services but investing in regeneration.  She said that residential homes in the private sector are not well monitored.  She also complained about not being able to get proper information from officers to put forward an alternative budget, describing this as a farce.  I have heard this before from opposition councillors.  She said an alternative suggestion for housing had not been accepted.

Cllr Olwen Hamer (0:45:15) claimed the council tax rise will support the poor in the city.  She apologised to care home residents and their families about issues they had had, but said the council works closely with the care quality commission, an investigation was carried out and nothing was found.   This rather proves Ann James’ point I think. Olwen Hamer’s comments generated angry grumblings in the public gallery.

Cllr Bagh Ali (0:46:56)accused Ann James of misleading the public, reporting that she had said she would vote against the budget without discussion.

Cllr Abi Brown (0:48:46) said 737 people voted for her on a principle of low council tax, she wanted common sense savings involving more economical use of buildings and postage and the council not funding union representatives.  She pointed out that Labour squanders a lot of money in interest payments.

Cllr Karen Clarke (0:52:06) made some sensible points about the privatisation of care homes leading to poorer terms and conditions for staff and concern over quality of service, but said she would support the budget.  Well, she’s Labour, so I imagine she’s been whipped to.

Cllr Joy Garner (0:57:21) blamed the government and said the council needs to spend money on redundancy payments.

Cllr Jack Brereton (1:00:57) said the council tax rise will hit some of the worst off and criticised the council’s approach.  He called the consultation a charade and said it wasn’t transparent or inclusive.  I would agree with him on this.   I was one of the 900 who responded but only on specific issues, especially the removal of help with bus fares for 16-18 year old students attending college, not that it got me anywhere.  I think that just shows how little value the council places on the education of our young people.  I didn’t respond on the entire budget on account of the document being so opaque and knowing they wouldn’t value my view anyway.

Cllr Martin Garner (1:04:07) had a general go at the Tory government and accused the Conservative and Independent councillors of being unfit.

Cllr Adrian Knapper (1:06:04) said, amidst guffaws of laughter from the public gallery, that he would not turn his back on the city.  His emphasis was all about helping business and promoting image.  Labour propaganda again then.

Cllr Tom Reynolds (1:09:17) supported the rise in council tax to increase the base from which to raise it further.

Cllr Dave Conway (1:11:21) presented a long list of criticisms of the Labour budget, pointing out that they have been cutting for years so can’t just blame the Tories.  He presented some previous quotes from Mark Meredith while the Labour government were in power, including “at a time of economic uncertainty and through these difficult times, the last thing people need at the moment is a big council tax rise“ and “we need to keep investing to create jobs”.  But Adrian Knapper had just said 73 people are chasing each job, showing Mark Meredith didn’t create the jobs he said he would.  Dave Conway asked how many of Labour would vote with their conscience today and prove themselves true socialists.  Needless to say they didn’t and they’re not.

Cllr Gwen Hassall (1:18:53) admitted they were all to blame but said they must ‘move forward’, whatever that means.

Cllr Sarah Hill (1.21.12) said she didn’t like Paul Breeze calling them names, but called the independent contributions pathetic.  She did agree with Abi Brown’s suggestions.  She said she cannot sleep at night.

Cllr Mark Meredith (1:25:09) said he smelled the scent of hypocrisy from the opposition and praised his former Labour government.  He seemed most concerned about roads with not a mention about actual people.

Cllr Terry Crowe (1:30:21) in a fit of extreme blandness said that Labour had listened and would take the city forward.  To me it seems the ‘forward’ direction they are taking us is over the precipice into catastrophe.

Cllr Alan Dutton (1:33:31) wimpishly said they have no choice.

Cllr Paul Shotton  (1:36:30) rightly pointed out that there were cuts under a Tory/Independent/LibDem cabinet.  He also seemed a bit obsessed about buildings and roads.

Although these cuts are not at all a laughing matter, I have to say that the summing up by Mohammed Pervez (1:40:04) did provide a bit of comedy.  He started off with a mantra to himself “I shall remain calm”.  It didn’t work!  He raised his voice and ended up hitting the bench.  You will have to watch it to get the most from it.

Lord Mayor Terry Follows (1:47:05) thanked Mohammed Pervez for his "calm and measured"  summing up.  A named vote was agreed.  The vote was 31 (Labour) for the budget and council tax rise and 8 (Independent and Conservative) against.  I think Terry Follows didn’t vote and as there had been 3 apologies for absence; Cllrs Conteh, Day and Lilley, that leaves one Labour councillor unaccounted for.  The minutes will reveal who.