Local Government « Crash Bang Wallace

Kent County Council’s “vampire killer”

markwallace | No Comments » Posted on January 20, 2012

Kent County Council’s Youth Service Transformation Consultation was never going to be the most exciting public process in the world – that is, until the war against the undead cropped up.

Among the obligatory quangos, District councils, MPs, PCSOs, parents and young people listed as responding to the consultation was one “First Sergeant”, whose occupation is listed quite prominently as “Vampire Killer”.

Sadly, the submission made by the modern-day Van Helsing of Kent has not been published. With council tax at the rate it is, perhaps he now views Kent County Council as a bloodsucking institution in its own right…

Hat-tip: Eagle-eyed Paul Francis, the ever-excellent Political Editor of the Kent Messenger for the original spot

Ken’s Con

markwallace | No Comments » Posted on January 09, 2012

Evening Standard polling on the London Mayoral Race shows clearly that transport fares, and the management of the underground service, is the only major chink in Boris’s armour. It’s a topic which is high on Londoners’ list of concerns and it’s the only area where Ken appears to have a distinct opportunity.

As a result, Ken Livingstone is hammering the issue, promising a 7% cut in fares. But can he be trusted to stick to this pledge for a so-called “fare deal”, or is it pie in the sky?

Judging by his track record, it’s the latter. In fact, he’s broken promises on fares at both of the last two Mayoral elections.

In September 2003, with an election coming up, Ken promised to peg fare rises to “no more than the rate of inflation”. But in September 2004, he announced tube fares would rise at inflation +1% and bus fares would jump by inflation +10%.

In December 2007, with another election approaching, he told the London Assembly “I intend to freeze Tube fares in real terms in 2009″. He lost the election, but by April 2008 leaked emails emerged showing that when he gave that pledge to the Assembly he had already signed off on higher than inflation rises for bus and tube passengers.

It’s understandable why Ken – lagging by 8 points in the polls behind Boris – is making increasingly desperate pledges to persuade voters. The question has always been how he will fund them. Looking at his past behaviour gives us the answer – he won’t have any trouble funding his 7% cut, because he makes a habit of breaking his promises as soon as the election is out of the way.

Blogger-Bashing Barnet Seeks Secret State

markwallace | 1 Comment » Posted on November 14, 2011

The ever-tenacious David Hencke has a report of some worrying attempts by Barnet Council to muzzle local bloggers.

Wasting goodness knows how much taxpayers’ money, the local authority has now twice tried to secure rulings that would mean in effect that no blogger may write about public officials.

A local blogger, Mr Mustard, identified a £50,000-a-year (plus perks) non-job, Barnet’s new “Change and Innovation Manager“. He was doing a good public service by spotting a wasteful post stuffed full of management-speak twaddle – taking up the charge much as the TaxPayers’ Alliance has encouraged people to do for some years now.

To properly investigate how this money was being spent, Mr Mustard investigated the public blog of the person appointed to the post – a Jonathan Tunde-Wright. This was perfectly reasonable – particularly when it turns out Mr Tunde-Wright appears to be a big fan of management mantras, such as:

I am persuaded that organisational culture eats strategy for breakfast.

All in a day’s work for a blogger scrutinising public spending. But that’s not how Barnet Council saw it.

Barnet have now twice tried to secure a ruling from the Information Commissioner that Mr Mustard was in breach of the Data Protection Act by daring to blog about someone who was not part of his own family or household. If successful, they could have had him slapped with a £5,000 fine – and, of course, silenced.

Mercifully, the ICO ruled against Barnet both times – but the fact they even tried to go down this route is disturbibg.

On the surface this attempt to silence a blogger in this way is pure aggression and censorship from a public body. They wanted to shut him up regardless of the fundamental right to free speech or the entirely positive influence of bloggers and the transparency agenda because they thought it would be better that way for Barnet Council.

Look deeper than that and it gets more concerning. Numerous times in my years at the TPA we encountered attempts by public bodies to draw a false distinction between public roles and the people who occupy them. We could, we were told, talk about a job title and the associated salary, but criticising the actual public servant was not allowed.

During the compilation of the annual Public Sector and Town Hall Rich Lists we regularly got FOI responses that refused to name even a council’s Chief Executive. Tellingly, Tunde-Wright repeats this mantra in David Hencke’s article:

I also do feel that by going beyond the Post to naming the Post Holder, referencing my personal blog and making particular comments, the said blogger may have crossed the line and placed myself and my family in this uncomfortable place of feeling harassed online.

This is a pernicious attack on transparency and accountability. The Post and the Post Holder should be open to scrutiny by the public who fund both of them. The existence of a job is only one element of public spending and administration – how well the person who holds the post actually does the job is equally important.

Barnet’s argument effectively means individual incompetence or other personal failings would be beyond the realm of public scrutiny. It would be like saying no-one could cover the Liam Fox scandal because talking about him as an individual was beyond the pale, and as everyone would accept the need for a Defence Secretary then he should have stayed in post.

It is good that the ICO was robust in defence of the free speech of bloggers – but appalling that a local authority would think public scrutiny is a bad thing and then try to use legal intimidation funded by taxpayers to silence their critics.

We clearly still have a long way to go until we have a proper transparency culture.

Ken ne regrette rien

markwallace | 2 Comments » Posted on November 10, 2011

Ladies and gentlemen, I proudly present the first video venture from CrashBangWallace.com. It explores all the things Ken Livingstone should be – but isn’t – sorry for from his terms as Mayor of London. Ken ne regrette rien…

Appropriately, Ken’s been shooting his mouth off again recently – this time telling LondonlovesBusiness.com that it’s ok that he’s matey with Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the extremist preacher who argues violence against Israel is justified. In fact, is there anything Ken has done that he’s ever said sorry for?

This is a man who drove Londoners’ council tax through the roof, ditched City Hall’s reputation into the gutter and “reached out” to Islamist extremists in an official capacity. Why should anyone give him another chance to do it all again?

Ken Livingstone fans revisit the failed ‘Tory Toffs’ tactic

markwallace | 23 Comments » Posted on October 11, 2011

Boris Johnson spoke at a Lambeth & Southwark Conservatives event last night in Lambeth Town Hall, rallying the troops in advance of next year’s GLA and London Mayoral election. In a retro return to the old days, a gaggle of Labour and Trade Union activists picketed the event, heckling guests as they arrived and making a minor nuisance of themselves.

It wasn’t just the sight of lefty pickets at Tory events that was a blast from the past, though – Ken Livingstone’s camp appear to be revisiting the “Tory Toffs” attack strategy that ultimately doomed Labour in the Crewe and Nantwich by-election. The organisers told protesters:

We would ask that formal dress be worn; bring your champagne flutes and martini glasses in the hope someone will provide some drink, and join us in trying to ensure that everyone may eat cake.

For those who don’t recall, this was exactly the approach that Labour took in Crewe and Nantwich in 2008 – Labour supporters turned up dressed in top hats to pursue an explicit class war strategy that they seemed convinced would work. It didn’t – the Conservatives got a 17% swing to take the seat, in part because voters were turned off by the stench of class warfare and the politics of envy. Even the Guardian described the toff attacks as “patronising, old-fashioned and divisive”.

Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that people who support Ken Livingstone are quite keen on things that are “patronising, old-fashioned and divisive”, given that you could plausibly put the phrase on Ken’s business card, but it doesn’t bode well for his election prospects. Particularly given that his old ally Lee Jasper was back in the thick of things, too, promoting the event on Twitter.

So here they are in all their glory, the politics-of-envy, class warriors who Ken apparently hopes will hand him the keys to the capital. I suspect the Boris campaign will be hoping they are wheeled out on a regular basis right up to polling day – as Crewe showed us, the more they do this, the more they will deter voters:

Greens running no-fingerprints anti-Boris campaign

markwallace | 11 Comments » Posted on September 01, 2011

Given Ken Livingstone’s pretty diastrous campaign so far, it’s unsurprising that a separate anti-Boris campaign has emerged online. “Sack Boris 2012″ has an active Twitter account, campaign site, a Facebook page and even merchandise like Oyster card holders and mugs. They’re starting to get some traction among lefty Twitterati, and are appealing for donations like nobody’s business.

But who are they?

On the site itself there are no “About” or “Who are we” section to illuminate as to who runs it, other than an outgoing link in the small print saying the site is “Published by Common People”. The Common People website is similarly opaque – the content fits just about every lefty stereotype, supporting UK Uncut, opposing any cuts, lining up behind Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine nonsense, laying into people who want to set up private educational establishments and so on and so on.

There is a “Who we are” section but it provides few answers:

Common People was founded at a corner table in the Bricklayer’s Arms, Putney, in June 2010 by a group of activists who have worked together over the past ten years on a wide range of campaigns, blogs and elections.

Right…

the board are members of the Green Party, the Labour Party and no party, but we all support the same principles of equality, rights, environmental protection and sustainability, and citizens working together to support each other and solve problems

Ok, but why no names still?

Fortunately, the internet has its own wonders, and a quick WHOIS search brings up the name of the person who registered the website: a James Killock. Surely not the James “Jim” Killock listed by Wikipedia as being the live-in partner of Sian Berry, the 2008 Green Party candidate for London Mayor?

Why are Common People and Sack Boris so secretive about who they are, to the point of keeping any names of both of their websites? For that matter, when do they intend to tell the people donating to them that their campaign is run by senior Green Party activists? What is the real Labour/Green split on their governing body?

Given that they are seeking to raise thousands of pounds to spend campaigning against Boris in an election, and that their mission is to “take an active part in influencing elections”, it’s surely only a matter of time before the Electoral Commission come sniffing around – and so far, Common People haven’t registered with them at all…

Notorious council fatcat becomes a hunt saboteur

markwallace | 3 Comments » Posted on July 04, 2011

You could be forgiven for having missed the news that the League Against Cruel Sports – aka the country’s leading mob of hunt saboteurs – have appointed a new Chief Executive. Like most people, my initial reaction was “who cares”, until the name of their new Chief Exec leaped out from the page: Joe Duckworth.

Mr Duckworth, better known to readers of Private Eye as “Vera” Duckworth, hasn’t always been a professional fox-hugger. The animal lovers should like him, though – until recently he was one of the most notorious fatcats in local government.

The LACS say he had “a long and distinguished career in local government” – and they’re right, if they mean it was distinguished by earning huge amounts of money and demonstratingremarkably little improvement for the people he was meant to be serving.

In 2006 and 2007 he was the Chief Executive of Isle of White council, cashing in a hefty £150,000 a year – almost twice the amount paid to his predecessor on the basis that he would turn the council round. According to sources quoted in the Telegraph at the time, his reign over the island was characterised by an “atmosphere of fear” due to his behaviour, and his departure was greeted with “a sigh of relief”.

And what did taxpayers get for their money? Nada. As one councillor said, “When he arrived we were a two-star council, and we are still a two-star council now he has gone.”.

After a failure like that, you’d assume he’d have disappeared into anonymity, but no. Vera’s next job was as Chief Executive of Newham – one of the UK’s poorest boroughs, where he raked in £280,000 in 2009-10 (according to the TaxPayers’ Alliance’s Town Hall Rich List).

The obscenity of anyone – particularly someone with a dismal track record in their previous job – cashing in so heavily at the expense of some of the poorest residents of any Borough in the country is plain to see. As for his output in Newham, safe to say it was less than stellar.

And now he’s joined the League Against Cruel Sports. Two questions face them: first, how can a small outfit with only 3-4,000 members afford someone with Joe “Vera” Duckworth’s expensive tastes? Second, event if they can afford the pay packet, can they afford to have someone so ineffective at the helm?

Is your council restricting your free speech?

markwallace | 1 Comment » Posted on June 30, 2011

The left-libertarian Manifesto Club have an interesting new report out today, on the assault against the freedom to distribute leaflets and flyers.

It may sound like a mundane thing, but with scores of local authorities either banning leafleting in public places or demanding that people buy a licence this is a very real limitation on free speech and the free market. Whether you’re promoting a political cause or advertising a business, you should be free to offer a leaflet about it to someone if you so wish – just as they should be free to refuse to take it.

The report is well worth a read, not least because it deals with a current issue in its historical context, drawing parallels with the tyrannical licensing of printing in the 17th Century. We often forget when focusing on the big, titanic battles over treaties or Acts of Parliament that often our liberty is lost in the small things, the quiet erosions of freedom that creep up on us with soft steps.

Ken chickens out in public – but is Jasper still advising him in private?

markwallace | 6 Comments » Posted on April 27, 2011

You read it here first that Ken Livingstone would be sharing a platform with Lee Jasper at the TUC rally next week. Since I broke the story it’s been followed up by Andrew Gilligan, and the Evening Standard – and now Ken has backed out of the event, citing “family commitments” that he apparently didn’t know about last week.

There seems to be more to find out here – this looks very much like an attempt by Ken to rehabilitate Jasper by re-establishing a public relationship with him. The question is, did their relationship ever stop in private?

Jasper has taken up the case of Smiley Culture – the 80s popstar who recently killed himself during a police drugs raid – as his latest publicity vehicle political issue. On 5th April the Standard reported:

Mr Jasper, who quit as one of Mr Livingstone’s closest aides after allegations over his conduct, warned that the black community was at “boiling point” over the incident.

On 26th April The Sun reported on the Smiley Culture case:

Ex London Mayor Ken Livingstone said the black community is at “boiling point” over his death.

Spot any similarities?

Jasper was Ken’s race and policing advisor for 8 years – is he still advising him behind the scenes? I just put in a call to Joe Derrett, Ken’s media guy, who denies outright that Jasper is part of the Ken campaign team. As for whether he’s giving informal advice, it’s the uncertain press officer’s standard answer: “not as far as I know”.

Funny, Ken and Lee must just be so likeminded after their years together that they use the same words when giving comments to the papers…

Crime mapping – power to the people

markwallace | 5 Comments » Posted on February 03, 2011

Finally – after years of arguments, promises and u-turns on the part of both Labour and the Conservatives – the Government has introduced crime mapping right across the country at www.police.uk.

Anyone who doubted that there was an interest among the public in finding out what crimes are committed in their neighbourhoods was immediately given a firm slap round the chops by the fact that the site received so much traffic it has at times struggled to deal with it all. At its peak it was getting 18 million hits an hour – a remarkable number.

Obviously, the Guardian chose to lead on the fact it crashed without reflecting on the fact that this proved what huge demand there is out there for this kind of transparency.

I’m personally delighted about crime mapping coming to the UK because it has been a massive hobby horse of mine in recent years. I first wrote about it for the TPA almost 3 years ago and since then I’ve met ministers, spoken at the Police Federation conference, addressed the Association of Chief Police Officers and generally banged the drum for this idea endlessly – not always making myself popular, it must be said.

This is a genuinely exciting reform. For the first time, everyone has the right to know what the real picture is of reported crime in a given area. That helps people moving house, scrutinising police performance and communicating with their MP.

It’s still just the start of the transparency and accountability revolution, though.

Giving people this information is a great start, but there’s plenty more to give. Other police forces are apparently experimenting with ways to provide even more data in greater accuracy and more informative formats. Yvette Cooper has called for full transparency on police numbers, which I can’t see a problem with. Ideally in my view each crime on the map would also be updated when it is either solved and prosecuted or shelved into a cold file. The possibilities are myriad.

Once you’ve given people information, you should also give them the power to do something with it, too. Now people are being given some data about how effective or ineffective their local police are, it is high time they were given the right to elect, scrutinise and – if necessary – sack the people in charge of the force.

The internet makes it possible for us to be given access to all that state data which our public employees compile about all of us in our name and at our expense. The digital revolution, if properly applied, can be a real revolution – handing power from hidden officials in back offices to the people. Crime mapping is an early and crucial step on that road to empowerment.

« Older Entries

Tags