Generally I don't make a habit of arranging and participating in deliveries of leaflets around my own ward on behalf of political parties who every four years fight my Independent Community Group (ICG) colleagues and I for our seats. However the TakeBackPowerHounslow campaign led by Brentford Liberal Democrat councillor Andrew Dakers, who is the Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for his party in Brentford & Isleworth constituency, offers to place the whole area of Community Engagement onto the parliamentary agenda and as such presents us with a very rare opportunity of rolling out what is essence an ICG programme across the whole country just a few short years after our own unsuccessful venture into the world of parliamentary politics.
The campaign, put in its simplest form, proposes sweeping changes in the way in which our MPs are held to account. New proposals, such as giving voters the power to "sack" MPs who underperform or abuse the system, would radically transform the way in which we're governed. At a time when confidence in politicians is perhaps at an all-time low in the wake of the expenses scandal, such an audacious programme might just be what is needed to restore confidence and thus arrest the drift towards extremism which threatens to cash in on the legitimate public disgust at the disappointing conduct of a discredited political centre.
A series of public meetings has been organised to debate the change agenda, beginning with what I hope will be a well-supported event in Isleworth. Full details are as follows:
ISLEWORTH: Monday, 6th July 2009 - Isleworth Public Hall, 7.30 pm
Chair - David Pavett (Chairman, Campion Concerns)
Councillor Phil Andrews (ICG)
Councillor Andrew Dakers (Lib Dem PPC, Brentford & Isleworth)John Hunt (Green Party)
HOUNSLOW: Tuesday, 7th July 2009 - Montague Hall, 7.30 pm
Chair - Peter Hughes (President, Brentford Chamber of Commerce)
Councillor John Connelly (Hounslow Independent Alliance)
Councillor Andrew Dakers (Lib Dem PPC, Brentford & Isleworth)John Hunt (Green Party)
BRENTFORD: Wednesday, 8th July 2009 - St. Paul's Church, 7.30 pm
Chair - Kath Richardson (Editor, Brentford TW8.com)
Councillor Andrew Dakers (Lib Dem PPC, Brentford & Isleworth)Councillor Jon Hardy (ICG)
John Hunt (Green Party)
Mary Macleod (Conservative PPC, Brentford & Isleworth)
CHISWICK: Thursday, 9th July 2009 - Chiswick Town Hall, 7.30 pm
Chair - Helen Barnes (Editor, Hounslow & Brentford Times)
Councillor Andrew Dakers (Lib Dem PPC, Brentford & Isleworth)
Henry Gewanter (Independent, involved in expenses leak to Telegraph)
Mary Macleod (Conservative PPC, Brentford & Isleworth)
I hope as many people as possible will come along and join in the debate, not just about MPs' expenses but also on the whole issue of democratic reform. More on this will follow the first meeting on Monday evening.
I write as I am grabbing a few last minutes before being forcibly decanted from my hotel room in Harrogate, where I have been spending a few days at the Local Government Association Conference (in Harrogate, not in my hotel room). This year, promisingly, the theme was "Big Issues, Local Solutions".
The highlight of the event, as always, was a series of speeches from political heavyweights in which their commitment to empowering local authorities was once again reasserted. And yet, after many years of such speeches by notables from all the main political parties, the same local authorities remain by and large unempowered. Is this likely to change?
One can but listen to the cases they make. First into the fray yesterday was Dr. Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat MP for Twickenham as well as Shadow Chancellor and Deputy Leader. When it came to my own approval rating Dr. Cable enjoyed an unfair advantage, due to the respect I have for him as a result of his work on behalf of residents suffering the activities of Mogden Sewage Treatment Works, which of course affects his own constituency as well as ours. Delivering an impressive presentation, Dr. Cable argued that local authorities can never be truly empowered for as long as they are dependent upon central government finance for the larger part of their budgets. After his speech I had the opportunity for a brief chat with Dr. Cable in which I stressed my support for the decentralist agenda which he appeared pleased we shared.
An hour or so later it was the turn of the Rt. Hon. David Cameron, Leader of the Opposition, who spoke of a "genuine localist revolution in government". Mr. Cameron acknowledged that delegates will have heard promises of more powers being devloved to local authorities before, but insisted that this time it was for real. He spoke of a new deal in which central government would hand much of its power to councils whilst expecting those same councils to hand more of their power "down" (why not "up"? - Ed.) to the communities themselves.
If he means it, and he gets the opportunity to do it, this can only be a good thing. However it came accompanied by a warning that significant resources would not be made available with which to finance the transformation. We would, instead, need to do "more for less" - a concept which, whilst I accept is sometimes doable by means of genuine efficiencies and eliminating waste - is more often in politics a justification for simply not doing at all. We shall see.
Lastly came the Rt. Hon John Denham, Secretary of State for Local Government. I make no political point when I say that I didn't really grasp the essential message of his speech. Possibly it was conference fatigue, or just maybe as a servant of the incumbent government his brief was to be more circumspect than those who aspire to power but don't yet have it. I know from personal experience that it is much easier to criticise from opposition.
In a couple of hours my colleague Councillor Paul Fisher and I will be heading back for London on the train, following the Leader of the Council whose reservation is for an hour earlier and other colleagues who departed yesterday. This evening we have an ICG social evening at a local hostelry at which we will discuss local issues and make plans for the immediate future. So much for the theory, this is the new localism in action.
I've not long returned from the annual Away Day of the Hounslow Homes Board, of which I am now a member, which this year took place at the Richmond Hill Hotel, just outside the gates of Richmond Park.
Despite it being called an Away Day, it is actually an Away Two Days as proceedings began yesterday (Friday) afternoon, and finished today (Saturday).
Some of my colleagues - both coalition colleagues from the Conservative Group and fellow ICG councillors - regard at least the overnight aspect of the event as an extravagance. Its defenders argue that it is the only occasion on which fifteen hard-working members of the Board, who are unremunerated for their efforts throughout the year, can avail themselves of such an opportunity to bond.
I very much doubt whether there is a "right" or "wrong" view about this, but nevertheless for good or for bad I opted to participate. I ate the lunch, stayed the night and participated in every session other than the "walkabout" at the close of the day, when I had to sneak off home slightly early to take my daughter to a party at the home of a schoolfriend some in some West End backwater.
One recurring theme of the discussions at the Away Day, both formal and informal, was the relationship between the Board and the local authority. It is very difficult for me to consider this question entirely as a new Board member without calling upon my previous experience as Lead Member for Housing for nearly three years. I am pleased that my Board colleagues seem to accept my new role as having the potential to introduce some fresh perspectives rather than viewing me as somebody whose brief is to keep an eye on them.
Prior to my being appointed to the Board I think it's fair to say that my opportunities to interact with the body as a whole had been limited. Regular partnership meetings were held with the Chair and Vice Chairs and with senior officers, and with the latter I also of course had many dealings on routine and sometimes not quite so routine operational matters. On the one occasion during the last year that I attended a Board meeting business was sadly sidetracked by some frankly unnecessary politicking from a very small number of members who unfortunately dominated the session. There are undoubtedly those for whom old habits do die hard.
But at this weekend's session I saw nothing but a group of highly motivated and capable people (and I refer both to officers and Board members) whose singular objective was to map out the future direction of the company as far as was possible against a background of uncertainty and probable change in the whole field of housing provision nationwide. There was no noticeable political agenda at play, even from the politicals (who are now very much a minority anyway) and the discussion was focussed, intelligent and very, very useful.
When I first assumed the role of Lead Member in 2006 things were very different. Even something as basic as arranging a meeting with senior officers presented seemingly insurmountable difficulties, with irritable negotiations about at which level it was appropriate to engage with whom, whether such and such an officer was of such importance that demanded the presence of the Leader of the Council and not a mere Lead Member, and much more besides. Views were exchanged but promises could not be depended upon to be kept, with word reaching us sometimes within half an hour of a meeting having ended that something completely different had been done than had been promised, and so on. And then there had been the small matter of the ill-tempered Hounslow Homes Management Review.
Back in those days I was charged with overcoming a horrible dilemma. There was no way things could have continued the way they were. As a point of principle I disagree with selling off social housing stock. My instinct was to take it back in-house but I recognised that ideologically this may have been difficult to sell to our coalition partners. And so, despite in theory being in control of the situation, I was negotiating from a place in limbo, unable to continue with the status quo but reluctant due to limited options to do anything to change it.
As often happens, fate intervened and the "oppo" gave way. There were important changes in the management team and a good working relationship was established. There were, of course, a few hiccups and flashbacks along the way, but by and large the relationship developed nicely.
Against all this, however, and in the face of what seems to be a very real recognistion of the benefits of a more tenant-focussed agenda, my fear has always been that this new positivism would not survive a return to a New Labour administration, that with a few tweaks the structure remained in place for a swift and seamless return to the bad old days. This weekend I saw the first very real signs that this might not be the case, even in the increasingly unlikely event of a reversion to Labour control next year. People seem to want to open up the organisation, to involve tenants and leaseholders, not because it is being something they are being told to do by the Lead Member but because it is self-evidently right. If anything, any political uncertainties come from elsewhere.
I left the Away Day highly enthused and encouraged about the future of Hounslow Homes. There are some procedural efficiencies that seem to be required of the organisation, but it has its heart in the right place and the personnel to make things work. It was perhaps symbolic that the event should have been held on a hill with a clear and panaromic view over miles around, with Ivybridge staring out boldly from the very centre of it. The late, great Tom Reader would, I believe, be a very happy man.
Unconfirmed rumours are reaching us that Hounslow Central Labour councillor Nisar Malik has been deselected by his own ward party, meaning that he'll have to look elsewhere for a seat to contest if he is to be in the running for a place on the next Borough Council.
I have made it clear before that in my view Nisar is one of New Labour's better councillors in Hounslow. He has a sincere commitment to building Community Cohesion and has been gracious and measured in his dealing with ICG councillors in a way that is untypical for a member of his Group. One is tempted to wonder whether this was the cause of his undoing.
Whilst the case for his selection or deselection is a matter for the Labour Party and not really any of my business, if this rumour is true this would appear to me to be a strangely retrograde step for a local party which after all isn't exactly overflowing with talent at this immediate moment in time.
Old mucker of mine though he may be, I can understand why there are people who would want to throw eggs at British National Party Chairman Nick Griffin. Denounced for years as the leader of a party which can trace its genealogy directly back - via the National Front, John Tyndall's Greater Britain Movement and Colin Jordan's National Socialist Movement - to Arnold Leese, the man who first conceived of gas chambers as the solution to the "problem" of Jewish people living in the world and who rejected Sir Oswald Mosley for his moderation, Griffin is now one of two men representing the BNP at the European Parliament.
The problem with Tuesday's egg-throwing protest of course, quite apart from the public order problem it presented, was not only that it allowed Griffin to emerge as the poor innocent victim making a stand for free speech against an intolerant political establishment, but also that he was granted airtime to talk about the egg throwing which he would otherwise have spent having to explain his confused and contradictory policies.
Rather than allowing him the opportunity to explain to the world why his "non-racist" party refuses to admit non-white members, or how it defines "Britishness" according to skin pigmentation rather than place of birth or length of residence, Nick Griffin was able not only to present himself as the champion of democracy and free speech, but even to implicate the three major parties in the egg-throwing protest by virtue of the fact they have given in-principle support to the organisation he alleges to have been responsible for it.
As such there can be little doubt that this exhibition, provoked as it may have been by the powerful call of a justified indignation, came across to most as a display of petulance and an own-goal of not inconsiderable proportions.
But own-goals are what the thing once known as the "Labour movement" has become rather good at. Let us not forget that in both the North West and Yorkshire & Humber the number of votes received by the BNP actually decreased. In both cases the BNP was able to scrape home as a direct consequence of traditional Labour voters, embittered by the betrayal and arrogance of their elected representatives, staying away in protest.
As a result of Labour's failure the rest of us are compelled to share the humiliation of having sent two men to Europe to make common cause with all manner of madmen and lunatics, with all the taxpayer-funded financial benefits that will bring to themselves and their organisations.
But if the failure today is Labour's, then at other times and in other places it will be someone else's. The cyclical nature of British politics is such that the big parties take it for granted that they will have their years in the limelight and their periods in the wilderness. Who is to say that after a spell in governement it will not next time be Conservative voters who are sitting at home sulking, while the BNP sends its people to Brussels on the strength of the votes of three percent of those on the Register of Electors?
Allegiance to the big political parties, allegiances which once were handed down from father to son and which centred around whole communities, are breaking down. There is no longer any clear ideological water separating the main protagonists, and it is not today a contradiction in terms to speak of a working-class Conservative or a "socialist" millionaire. With the advance of internet technology which creates a more level playing field between those with the resources to print and distribute millions of leaflets and those without, smaller parties are becoming less small. At last Thursday's Euro elections nearly 43% of those who voted in the United Kingdom placed their cross next to the name of a party outside of the big three.
In consideration of all this, those who would have us believe that the big established parties are our only defence against the relentless onward march of fascism are short changing us. A few more votes for UKIP or the Green Party in the North West and Yorkshire & Humber would have kept both successful BNP candidates out of Europe. Big party politics didn't protect us, it failed us.
In the London Borough of Hounslow we have six political groups on the local authority where once there were two. Our own, the Independent Community Group (ICG), holds six seats and with it the balance of power on the council. In the community we talk about the issues that local people want to talk about. We get things done. With 1,500 members spread out largely over two wards signed up to a program of positive community action, radical but outspokenly anti-racist, imaginative, unconventional and people-centred there is no space in which the BNP or any other racist party could successfully operate.
And yet this is the Politics That Dare Not Speak Its Name. A popular anti-fascist blog on which I frequently post only ever blocks my contributions when I dare to suggest that it is the community itself, not the Labour Party, to which we should be looking in the fight against fascism.
The concept is not restricted to my own neighbourhood. There are residents' groups and action parties springing up all around the place which strike the same chord as we do with voters who are fed up the mainstream politicians and their parties. They are organic, supported and often joined by those whom conventional politics could never reach, and are fairly much insulated against the ebb and flow of political trends. There is not the slightest shadow of a doubt in my mind that they are, by some considerable margin, the most effective defence against organised fascism taking hold in our communities.
The problem for us for the moment is that, anti-fascism nothwithstanding, we still have more eggs thrown at us than the leader of the BNP does.
On March 4th Hounslow Council's Sustainable Development Committee infamously gave planning permission to the water giant Thames Water to expand its foul-smelling Mogden sewage plant, allowing for a massive increase in capacity.
At that meeting, officers of the London Borough of Hounslow recommended approval of the application on the grounds that to so do would give the local authority more "control" over Thames Water's operation and in particular would enable us to challenge the company's notoriously dismissive attitude towards the protests of long-suffering local residents. Whilst doing so they omitted to explain to Committee members that the local authority already had all the power it needed to exercise such control as a result of Abatement Notices which it had secured previously, but lacked the will or desire to enforce.
There followed a presentation by the officers and some slick patter from Thames, who misled the Committee by quite falsely claiming that it could not agree to residents' requests to cover its storm tanks - a necessary precondition of meaningful odour reduction - because it required permission to do so from the water regulator OfWAT. Despite knowing this to be completely untrue, officers at the meeting chose not to point out to members that Thames was not telling them the truth.
When the officers and Thames were done a well-briefed duo of New Labour councillors rushed forward to respectively propose and second approval of the officer recommendation. At first other councillors resisted, even at one stage voting for refusal, but after being subjected to a relentless and unprecedented barrage from Thames, the Labour duo and council officers the majority, with the honourable exception of ICG councillor Jon Hardy, cravenly relented and gave the Thames Water bullies everything they had asked for.
Reassured by Hounslow's moral cowardice Thames' next move, rather than thanking their luck and getting on with the job, was typically to stall for even further concessions. But, having procrastinated over even the useless conditions attached to the permission given to them on March 4th, they created a problem for themselves by so doing because they had effectively talked themselves out of the deal, and consequently the whole application came back to SDC yesterday evening.
During the intervening period we in the ICG have done much to try to raise the profile of this whole disgraceful episode. Following idiotic comments to the effect that as the Mogden Residents' Action Group (MRAG) had only send one speaker to SDC on March 4th the wider public were therefore not bothered by the proposed expansion, MRAG and the ICG called a Day of Action on April 1st during which thousands of leaflets were distributed in Isleworth, Hounslow South and Whitton and close to 100 protestors came out at a few hours' notice to demonstrate the public's disgust over the conduct of the SDC.
Perhaps more significantly, we forced the appointment of Councillor Jon Hardy to the specific portfolio area of liaison with Thames Water.
Traditionally, dealings with Thames Water had fallen within the general remit of Environment. Aware that we had been getting nowhere back in 2008, we informed the Leader of the Council at the time that we would like Mogden to become a specific responsibility under the leadership of an ICG councillor, and Councillor Paul Fisher was duly appointed to the role. Within hours of hearing the news, officers had lobbied the Borough Solicitor who pointed out, perhaps not unreasonably, that as a participant in the residents' litigation against Thames Water Paul could be perceived to have a conflict of interest, and was thus effectively neutered. The indecent haste with which Paul's appointment was scuppered however gives some indication as to how relatively protected senior officers had felt under the previous set-up.
This year things were different. Jon is not a litigant and as such his appointment to the portfolio cannot be challenged. Nevertheless, there was the small matter of the planning application which was now being brought back to SDC, giving those who had been played for mugs at the previous meeting an unusual second opportunity to get up off their knees and strike a blow for the residents of Isleworth and neighbouring areas.
Sadly it was not to be. Deja vu all over again - officers recommending approval, New Labour members of the Committee proposing it and the Muppet Show giving a virtuoso repeat performance after a few worthless token words of disapproval about the excesses of the plant's operation. Thames Water must be laughing hysterically, but the residents are unlikely to see the funny side.
Residents of Isleworth, and their delegates in the form of the ICG, have once again been served notice that we stand alone. Increasingly cocky officers who think they only have a few months longer to put up with us find common cause with "allies" whose interest in Isleworth wanes with every day closer we get to the end of our term of office and opponents who, just as they did when they held sway in Isleworth, simply seem to derive some kind of perverted pleasure from making our residents suffer.
Councillor Hardy, who has already proved to be a fearsome campaigner for the rights of the Mogden residents, takes a very gentlemanly approach to fighting these battles. At the end of yesterday's meeting he even thanked the Chair of the Committee for giving him a fair hearing. Our civility and manners cannot be held against us, and our response now and in the future to the hammering that we continue to receive from friend and foe alike over Mogden should not be taken personally by anybody concerned.
But anybody who doubts that that response will be a very, very vigorous one indeed had better open their coffee jar and take a deep, deep sniff sometime extremely soon.
LATEST - Today's Hounslow Chronicle (12th June 2009) has wrongly reported Councillor Paul Fisher as having voted in support of the expansion of Mogden. This is completely untrue. Paul is no longer even a member of the SDC, and has made it clear he would have supported the residents by opposing the recommendation had he been in a position to do so.
The Chronicle has agreed to print a retraction in its next issue.
Incredibly it's over two weeks since I last posted on this blog. I recall a time as a kid when Crossroads was off the air for several months, and when it returned the cast had to narrate the events which had passed before bringing the story up to date. I guess I'll need to do something similar here.
May 21st - I had the pleasure of accompanying the new Mayor Councillor Paul Lynch, along with the Leader of the Council Peter Thompson and colleagues Councillors John Todd, Gerald McGregor and Paul Fisher on a tour of Fuller's Brewery in Chiswick (below). Some of the complexities and specialist knowledge involved in brewing defies belief. Apparently London water has a consistency which makes it ideal for brewing dark beers such as porter and stout, and is the reason for Guinness locating itself into this part of the world when it opened up its operation in the UK. The best water for bitter production on the other hand hails from Burton-on-Trent, and Fuller's physically alter the consistency of our London water (a process known as "Burtonisation") before using it in its bitter production.
Then it was back to West Mid for a private meeting with the consultant who had looked after Caroline's stepfather Jim before he sadly passed away on December 29th. Nobody seems certain at this stage as to what was the cause of his death.
May 22nd - Councillor Paul Fisher and I joined representatives of The Isleworth Society (TIS), The Four Roads Residents' Association, Hounslow Homes and Isleworth Youth Action Partnership (IYAP) for a photo-shoot to celebrate the launch of the excellent Windows on Isleworth project, which has seen students from local schools producing some phenomenally good artwork to help brighten up Ivybridge, as well as the King's Arms site in South Street (see below).
Then it was across to the ROWE Centre on the Worton estate to discuss the residents' association's application for a grant from the Rainbow Project to develop the Community Centre into a more multi-purpose resource.
May 25th - The Bank Holiday marked the beginning of half-term week, during which I struggled determinedly to catch up with some work while the children (and others!) screamed relentlessly in the background like ones deranged.
June 2nd - The Worton surgery, some housing problems and ongoing issues relating to estate matters. The residents' association at the ROWE Centre always make us feel at home, sustaining us with tea and all the latest info from around the neighbourhood.
June 3rd - The day before the elections to the European Parliament, and five of us ventured out to the Syon estate to distribute an ad hoc ICG leaflet urging residents not to vote for the BNP at the following day's polls. As always we were received with enthusiasm by the locals. On our travels we managed to liberate a leaflet that had been sent out by Ann K££n, our alleged Member of Parliament, informing potential voters that the BNP could only be kept out by voting for her party. A blatant lie as the d'Hondt system places more or less equal value on a vote for any other candidate, but this is the kind that of thing that we have become accustomed to.
June 6th - Ivybridge surgery, more housing issues and more hospitality from the girls at the Bridgelink Centre café. This time I had to be away early for an important meeting at my son's school, and in the absence of Paul (away in Kazakhstan) his wife Councillor Shirley Fisher kindly deputised for the last 45 minutes of the session.
June 8th - A meeting of the Members' Constitutional Working Party and then on to next door for my first ever meeting as a member of the Sustainable Development Committee. I must have broken a record for brevity - having entered the meeting mid-way through a debate on a proposed Chiswick development I was unable to vote, and when the second and last item - Mogden - came up I was required to leave the room as an interested party. More on this shortly.
Acknowledgements to Nick Cohen, The Observer.
The real cause of our anxieties is not the potential of the far right. It's the emergence of people power.Never underestimate how fast fear can swell in Britain. Sophisticated politicians and commentators analyse the "moral panics" of the masses about immigration and crime while remaining unaware of their own irrational prejudices. For in its nervous moments, polite society is just as panicky as the most hysterical tabloid reader. The veil of good manners slips and it describes its fellow citizens as tattooed and shaven-headed brutes who, given the right circumstances, would vote for the modern equivalent of the Nazi party.The conditions ought to be right this summer. Indeed, I cannot imagine better conditions for a neo-fascist advance. Britain is coming to the end of the longest wave of immigration in her history. I argued when it was at its height that we could take a modest pride in the absence of rioting mobs and burning crosses, but I had to temper my patriotic sentiments with the admission that mass immigration came while the economy was booming and the public was more interested in shopping than taking to the streets. At the risk of stating the obvious, the boom is over. Unemployment is rising and anger at foreigners taking British jobs is rising with it.To make matters worse - or better from the point of view of extremists - this parliament has disgraced itself. Its frauds turned Westminster into a tax haven and the House of Commons fees office into a cash machine that kept on giving. The electorate has gone from its normal state of surly acquiescence into a righteous fury.Even before the scandal broke, no less an authority than the Archbishop of Canterbury warned that Britain needed to heed the lessons of Nazi Germany and accept "a very high risk of financial stringency leading to political extremes - anger finding its expression in xenophobia. The fact that the BNP can win a seat in Sevenoaks is a straw in the wind and we have to watch the horizon very, very carefully for the tempest that might be behind that".I would mock him for imagining the leaders of the British National party crying: "Today Sevenoaks! Tomorrow the world!" But then it is just the kind of thing the leaders of the BNP would say and, in any case, the archbishop is hardly a lone voice. The combination of economic and political crises has led many politicians and journalists to predict sweeping BNP advances - five, six maybe seven European seats.The party was hiding its roots in European fascism, they argued, and putting on respectable suits and friendly smiles to calm the electorate. It looked set to prosper.I accept that it is foolish to call an election before a vote has been cast, and low turnouts can produce freak results, but the evidence that the BNP is surfing popular outrage is hard to find.On Thursday, the voters of Salford's Irwell Riverside ward ought to have given the far right an easy victory. If Salford is no longer Friedrich Engels's classic slum of "dirt and poverty", most of the ward's white, working-class voters still live in run-down terraces. Hazel Blears, Salford's Labour MP, did not share their struggles. She claimed for three different properties in one year, along with assorted televisions, beds, mattresses, curtains, pots, pans and overnight stays at one of London's chicest hotels.After journalists worked out that she had managed to avoid capital gains tax after selling one home she had done up at public expense, she waved a cheque for £13,000 on television and announced she would send it to HM Revenue. Her gesture would have been less tactless if the idea of ever being in a position to write a cheque for £13,000 were not beyond the dreams of many of her constituents.Yet Blears stood at the count in Salford and saw Labour hold the seat. Its support was down, but despite the recession and the scandals, the BNP stayed stuck in third place, its share of the vote up a mere 3.8% on last year.The anti-fascist campaigners, who gather around Searchlight magazine, were not surprised. They say that internal BNP documents show it to be a feeble organisation, running out of money and credible candidates.They do not think its strategy of dressing thugs in suits is working and nor do I. Not the least of the BNP's problems is that Nick Griffin was caught on camera at a meeting with the former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke explaining how he would seek to con the public by using warm words - freedom, security, identity, democracy."Perhaps one day, once by being rather more subtle we've got ourselves in a position where we control the British broadcasting media, the British people might change their mind and say, 'Yes, every last one must go.' But if you offer that as your sole aim to start with, you're gonna get absolutely nowhere. So, instead of talking about racial purity, we talk about identity."Griffin has fooled the occasional journalist, but the regular convictions of BNP members for racial assaults, drug dealing and sex crimes leave most people in no doubt that the new BNP is no different from the old BNP: an alliance of criminals with criminal policies.If it fails to break through even in these propitious circumstances, however, it will still have revealed a latent prejudice in the British elite.Alongside honourable concerns lurks a suspicion of popular power. Listen carefully whenever proposals are discussed to improve local democracy by, say, electing chief constables and police authorities.Eventually, an authoritative voice will tell you that the British cannot be trusted with more power because they may let the BNP take over the police forces.Similarly with reforms to the national voting system. Once again, we are told that a fairer election system cannot be contemplated because it will let the BNP out of its cage.The best reason for hoping that it is trounced is not that a vile party will have gone down to a deserved defeat, but because it will make it harder for the opponents of reform to argue that their fellow citizens are nasty children whose betters cannot allow them to run their own affairs.
Annual Borough Council on Tuesday night saw some major changes - for us in the ICG anyway - in the team to be fielded by the administration for its final year in office before the 2010 local elections.
First and foremost came the change of Mayor. It doesn't seem like a month, let alone a year, since our own Councillor Dr. Genevieve Hibbs assumed the honour of becoming the borough's first citizen, but last night she was replaced by Conservative Chiswick Riverside councillor Paul Lynch. Likewise her Deputy Councillor Shirley Fisher was succeeded by Councillor Barbara Harris. Both will, I have no doubt, prove to be inspired appointments.
Both Genevieve and Shirley have done the ICG proud. The ICG duo imposed their own personalities on the office and enhanced the reputation of our Group throughout the borough and outside of it. Anybody who might have felt that their appointments last year were a less than serious sop to a needed coalition partner will have found themselves surprised. Genevieve held pride of place amongst the short but growing line of "characters" who have held the office of Mayor since the formation of the new administration in 2006.
More personal to me, of course, was my decision to stand down as Lead Member for Housing and Community Safety and as a member of the Executive.
In what has been almost three years of office I have done too much and made too many good friends to be able to do it all justice here. I can only say that I have worked with some first class officers and partners and that I wish every one of them all the very best of luck for the year ahead and for the future.
In Housing my first task when assuming my role in 2006 was the Hounslow Homes Management Review, which became a battleground for two conflicting sets of ideals. My mission, indeed it had been my only mission when the ICG was first launched in 1994, was a simple one - to create a level playing field on our estates which would enable all residents to become involved in the process of estate management if they so wished irrespective of their politics. That I managed to achieve this at the end of an almighty battle was due in no small part to the tenaciously loyal service that I received during that struggle in particular from Susanna White (now moved on to pastures new), Sue Witherspoon, Barbara Perry and Yvonne Birch, and from other officers who were part of their team.
In the field of Community Safety and in the associated areas of Equalities and Community Cohesion there are so many officers who have given me their total, and sometimes very vocal backing that I am frightened to try to list them in case I leave anybody out, but they all know who they are and I shall miss the terrible accents (Amolak) and the even more terrible haircuts (Emmanuel) that I encountered so frequently as I strolled through the pavilion.
It would be wrong not to give special mention to the Head of Community Safety, Kirti Sisodia, who manages the department so well, as well as Uttam Gujral, Joan Conlon, Celia Golden, Sabin Malik (cruelly taken from us by Whitehall), Kate Tomkinson, Kathy Riley, Permjit, Adrian, Moushami, Aine .... I thought I wasn't going to mention names! Seriously, every last one of them did me really, really proud.
The sense of sadness that comes with stepping down however is tempered by the knowledge that the Group will be represented on the Executive by two huge and growing talents in Councillor Paul Fisher (Isleworth) and Councillor Jon Hardy (Syon). Between the three of us we've enjoyed much debate over the last couple of years about who should play what role at the top table, but Paul had demonstrated such a command of his portfolio over the past year and Jon suggests so much promise that I'm not in the slightest doubt that me standing down was the right thing for me to do at this particular time.
Having shuffled the pack, Paul now passes Service Improvement to Jon who is also Lead Member for Housing. In turn Paul inherits Community Safety to add to his Community Engagement and (bizarrely) Parking portfolios. Paul will handle the Executive side of my responsibilities to Brentford Football Club, whilst to the likely delight of some Jon assumes responsibility for managing our relations with Thames Water over Mogden.
It's not exactly retirement, alas. As well as remaining Leader of the Community Group on the local authority I have also been nominated to the Board of Hounslow Homes, an interesting progression from having been Lead Member. Last night (Wednesday), less than 24 hours after having been confirmed as a Board Member, I sat at St. Catherine's House in the company of Alf, Mohammed, Gillian, Bernadette, David and Jill - all people I had worked with so closely (and I like to think so well) in my previous incarnation - making decisions as part of the management team that will have to be considered by the new Lead Member.
Looking at one or two comments on other threads it would appear that there is already some speculation as to the reasons behind my decision. Nobody suspects altruism in the world of politics. But, like a successful football manager, my brief is to play the right players in the right positions during the right match.
I believe I have got that decision right.
Tonight the Green Room at Hounslow's Treaty Centre was filled to the rafters as I explained to my audience the mechanics of Project Empower.
Now a confession - that is not quite the achievement that it might at first have sounded. The Green Room is a small committee room on the periphery of the much larger Paul Robeson Theatre, and there were enough seats - and food - to provide for the thirty or so people in attendance.
Nevertheless, it was a slightly larger attendance than we'd anticipated from this first of three "satellite" meetings which had been arranged to compliment the launch of the Project at last weekend's HFTRA Conference and, more importantly still, those assembled were uniformly enthusiastic about the Project and what it is already being understood to symbolise.
Some great ideas were forthcoming, not least from a large contingent of tenants from Heston, and a real sense of purpose pervaded the short meeting as it broke up into discussions between small groups of residents and officers who, along with myself, were engaging with the residents at close quarters.
This is the environment in which I feel most at home, meeting new people and interacting with the community which it is my privilege to represent. With the greatest of respect both to senior officers of the council and to my Executive colleagues, meetings such as this are, to me, worth a hundred sittings of the Executive or one-to-ones in a remote office discussing the latest Report. This is what it is truly about.
What I also picked up was the real warmth and passion with which officers, in this case from Hounslow Homes, were embracing this work. I know that at least some of the people involved not very long ago were less enthusiastic about my management of the portfolio area. I don't think I'm being naive when I say I sensed something very, very different this evening as Project Empower was being rolled out before another group of residents.
Tomorrow is Annual Borough Council and as always, if the voting goes right, there is likely to be a slight shuffling of the pack. It provides a stark reminder of the speed with which a term of office comes and goes and, this being the last such meeting before the next local elections, heralds an urgency about work still to be done.
Being mindful of the fact that I am a notorious repeater of myself, I spent part of my weekend reflecting on what I should report about this year's HFTRA (Hounslow Federation of Tenants' and Residents' Associations) Conference that I didn't say last year. Only then did it occur to me that this blog is now actually over a year old! Doesn't time fly?
Well, this year I had the pleasure of both opening the Conference and giving the closing speech. Following hot on the heels of my introduction was a workshop, attended by all delegates, at which a Panel of senior Hounslow Homes officers took questions on the subject of Service Charges.
And many questions there were too. Some of them could easily have been predicted, whilst others called for quick thinking on the part of the Panel.
I think most if not all officers accept my view that the implementation of the second tranche of Service Charges this year could have better handled. I believe strongly that residents have a right to know why they are being asked to pay for a service, even if they don't agree that they should be paying it. And if a charge is patently unfair - as is the charge for communal electricity, even though we can do nothing about it - then the easiest and most honest thing is simply to say so.
It is because we didn't do this from the outset that we received a large volume of enquiries when the bills first went out, most of them from tenants demanding to know why they should pay for street columns on estates managed by Hounslow Homes, when they also pay for street lighting throughout the borough through their Council Tax. Or why they are paying for grounds maintenance when they cut their own grass. Or for Neighbourhood Wardens whose services they have thus far never needed.
Other than for the aforementioned injustice - forced upon us by government policy - of the charge for street lighting, there are reasonable explanations for all of the other charges. If one considers that all residents of the borough pay - through their Council Tax - for the upkeep of parks and open spaces irrespective of whether they use them, for the police service irrespective of whether they have been victims of crime, or for cemeteries irrespective of whether they wish to be cremated, charges for the maintenance of grassed verges on an estate whether or not they are immediately outside one's home do not seem so unreasonable after all. But if we do not explain it, we cannot expect tenants to understand it. Let alone accept it.
The good news is that this truism now seems to be accepted by all, and the Panel responded skillfully to the questions with humility and authority in equal measure. Most importantly of all, they acknowledged old mistakes and pledged to make good.
At the closing end of what turned out to be a very useful and enjoyable day, I was called upon once again to pick up the (very temperamental) microphone, this time to explain the rationale behind Project Empower, the name now given to the scheme, backed by Borough Council in January in the face of depressingly predictable opposition, to release £4 million of HRA (Housing Revenue Account) funds for service improvements to be identified by tenants.
The response from the floor to this talk provided for an interesting socio-analytical study. From those whom I've come to know as firm advocates of tenant participation there was tangible enthusiasm. Particularly supportive of my empowerment initiatives, for which I'm truly very grateful but the reasons for which I've yet to fully appreciate, have been the rapidly growing number of Somali ladies (it's nearly always ladies for some reason) who now attend HFTRA activites. Conversely, the questioning from those whom I've learned to associate with the "old guard" focused entirely on service issues and then with a primarily economic emphasis, much of it as it happened completely unrelated to the theme of the speech that I'd made.
Herein lies the essential difference between the two mindsets that have been doing battle in the field of community activity since the ICG arrived at the heart of local politics. For some the passion for involvement, engagement, participation - for others the dreary belief that all residents want in life is to be provided by their political masters with good service, in exchange for which comes their silence and acquiescence. Whilst the latter is a view that I and some of my colleagues tend to associate mostly with New Labour, I don't think any of us are oblivious to the fact that our ideology, if that is the correct term to use, is considered an eccentric enthusiasm by many on all sides of the traditional political divide. That for which our opponents despise us, many of our allies merely tolerate us. We know that.
Nonetheless when I think back to the battles of 2006 I am proud that we have placed tenant engagement into the forefront of everything we do, and I look forward to the coming year with excitement and some impatience when considering the work still to be done before we next go the polls.
If you are like me you will be underwhelmed by the imminence of the European Elections which are to take place on June 4th. I haven't even thought about who I might be voting for yet, and if one considers that I'm actually involved in politics on a day to day basis then what does that say for the sense of excitement that the contest must have induced in most other people?
With the recent revelations about MPs' expense claims, the public can be forgiven for being unenthusiastic about any of the main parties. To paraphrase the old poster slogan, wouldn't it be funny if they called an election and nobody turned up?
Sadly, uninspiring though the established politicans may seem or indeed be, not turning out to vote may have far graver consequences than electing some undeserving bounty hunter of whatever political hue. Under the d'Hondt system of Proportional Representation that is to be used for the purpose of allocating seats, any party that achieves more than a stated minimum percentage of votes in any given region will have at least one member elected to the European Parliament.
Even in less cynical times, British voters on the whole never cared have too much who is elected to Brussels. At the previous two Euro Elections, also conducted under PR, a large protest vote went respectively to the Green Party and to the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP). What is significant is that neither party was particularly in the ascendancy at the time when they achieved their success. They were just in the right place at the right time when the British voter had the opportunity to register a protest.
The party which finds itself in a similar position today is the British National Party (BNP). As an ex-member of the National Front myself (a party in which many of the current BNP leaders, including the Chairman Nick Griffin, cut their political teeth) I have been studying the BNP's recent fortunes at close quarters. Having exploded onto the scene from relative obscurity a few years ago, the BNP has hovered steadily at around its current level for the last few years. Whilst is hasn't imploded in the sensational manner of the National Front at the 1979 General Election, it has flatlined somewhat, with the odd victory being celebrated but at least as many losses being quietly recorded.
Anybody who takes reassurance from this that the BNP will not present a major threat on June 4th, as some anti-racists seem to have done, is a fool. The general public do not know about the internal issues that trouble the BNP, nor will they have a sophisticated handle on its recent election results. The simple fact is that the BNP, like the Greens and UKIP before them, are the ones who are strategically poised to take advantage of the low voter turnout and the wave of quite understandable disillusionment that is sweeping the country at the moment.
In a certain respect as observers go I am in a unique position. It may be nearly twenty years since I abandoned the ideology (or more precisely the ideologies, for they changed like the wind) that I had pursued along with my former NF comrades back in the 1980s, but I have seen many of the current BNP leaders and their methods at close quarters. Along with one or two others I actually pioneered the electoral strategy that much later brought the BNP its limited successes.
Although he is older, bigger and has one eye fewer than he did when I knew him, the Nick Griffin I see on Newsnight and the equally slick performer who graces our various news bulletins is the same guy that I have enjoyed many a curry and a beer with, visited at his home, been entertained by his family (and he by mine) and talked politics and strategy with on countless occasions. Because I believe I always got along well with Nick Griffin and because our parting was political rather than personal, I have difficulty seeing in him the swivel-eyed monster of traditional anti-fascist folklore. Nonetheless, I firmly believe that the election of BNP MEPs on June 4th would be an unmitigated disaster for our community.
As an NF activist in the 1980s one of my pet hates was the media. No matter what the NF did any coverage received, as I saw it then, was hostile and inaccurate. It was so unfair. Worse than that, it was a plot. A Jewish plot. The possiblity that the complexities of the obscure and irrational ideology that I followed in those days might have been innocently misunderstood was not to be contemplated in the black and white world of the fanatic. The whole world was against us. They were wrong, and we alone were right.
And so it is that, rather than rely upon media interpretation to inform my opinion of the BNP today, my instinct is to look at the publications and the public pronouncements of the BNP itself. In recent years the BNP has gone to a lot of trouble trying to remodel itself as a legitimate and mainstream, if still very right wing, political party. It has dropped its lunatic commitment to "the compulsory repatriation of all non-white immigrants along with their dependents and descendants" and has instead adopted an ostensibly more reasonable policy of "voluntary repatriation". It isn't about race any more guv, it's only about numbers.
I giggle slightly wickedly when I read about all this, because having been there amongst the people involved I know the perpetual juggling act that Nick Griffin will have been forced by his own "conversion" to the BNP's new "Civic Nationalist" values to perform, reassuring his own loyal followers that he remains privately "of the faith" whilst simultaneously trying to impress the wider world that he is a changed man. It isn't easy, and the reason it isn't easy is because it isn't honest.
I believe it was this dichotomy which backed Nick Griffin recently to into an ideological corner, compelling him to spell out the old racist values that still underpin the "new" BNP. Speaking to the BBC, he declared that Asian Britons and black Britons "do not exist" and that people from African-Caribbean backgrounds and Asian backgrounds should be regarded as "racial foreigners", irrespective of whether they arrived yesterday or whether their ancestors have lived in the UK for generations. Somehow Nick Griffin and the BNP still insist on trying to square this with their protestation that they are not a racist party.
It is vital that voters who may be disillusioned with the mainstream understand that the BNP are not a benign protest party. People have every right to be discontented in the current climate. It is perfectly legitimate to question the size of the population and the various social consequences of excessive immigration. But the BNP's concerns, as evidenced by Nick Griffin's comments, are not about numbers, nor for that matter about jobs, housing, education nor anything else of that kind. They are about race. Just as they were when I was involved with the far right. All that has changed, essentially, is the packaging.
So if you are of the belief that the hard-working, friendly and decent family living next door to you, born in the UK of Asian parents or decended from Asian grandparents but thoroughly Anglicised, cannot be British due to an accident of birth - or If you believe that the black guy who drinks in your pub and speaks with a London accent and goes to watch football is not as good as you, or the same as you, because his grandfather came to England on a boat from Trinidad to work on the London buses - then the British National Party is maybe the party you should be voting for.
But if your concerns are merely those that we all share, especially at a time of economic privation, or if you are simply angry that so many of our "leaders" seem to more content with filling their faces and living like kings while the rest of us struggle to make ends meet, then there are easier ways of making your protest than by voting for a supposedly "non-racist" party that by its own admission judges people's Britishness according to skin pigmentation.
The beauty of the d'Honst system is that, just as it makes it easier for extremist parties to gain a foothold in our political institutions, so it also provides us with an easy means of keeping them out. Just vote for someone else. Anyone else. If none of the big parties float your boat at the moment there will be plenty of green parties, yellow parties, purple parties, rainbow alliances and Baron Bucketheads putting their fortunes to the test. A vote for one of them will do just as nicely to keep the BNP out.
If you vote for the BNP and it gains seats at Brussels on June 4th you will have done more than register a protest. You will have handed an openly racist party hundreds of thousands of pounds in funding which effectively comes with every Euro seat. The knot you tied in the establishment's shoelaces as a lesson may prove very difficult indeed to undo.
Even if you are as uninterested in the Euro elections as I am, and as uninspired by the large majority of the people who inhabit or seek to inhabit the European Parliament on our behalf, it is in the interests of our strong and united local community that you go out and vote. The Sunday Sport Party might yet see power.
There have been a few events over the last week or so that ordinarily I would have blogged about. The superb and well-attended event hosted at All Saints' Church by The Isleworth Society (TIS) to launch a new panoramic web feature about the Isleworth riverside. A council Executive meeting on Tuesday at which, amongst other things, Councillor Paul Fisher was able to bring some long awaited relief to some of our small traders who are suffering the effects of recession by reducing parking charges on vulnerable shopping parades. Some ongoing issues surrounding Mogden, including the provision of funding by the Executive for 24-hour monitoring and confirmation by the Leader of the Council that the residents have his full support in their battles with Thames Water and the reverberations that that unambiguous announcement undoubtedly had in the corridors and offices of Hounslow Civic Centre, where unhelpful power games have been played out in recent weeks.
For whatever reason none of these events, although milestones in their own right, made it to these pages. This was very possibly a consequence of me being emotionally distracted by the untimely passing of my friend and former next-door neighbour Alison Cole (above) at the tragically young age of 39.
Alison was the youngest daughter of Pat Cole, who as a child was my mother's closest friend and who many years later, until very recently, held the post of Deputy Chair of the ICG for some years. In recent months Pat and the leadership of the Group had become slightly estranged, a thing which was entirely our fault but never intentional as we all wrestled with the incredible demands on our time and energy of being so few involved closely - and disproportionately - in the everyday business of running a local authority, but she has remained a friend and colleague and we are all passionately determined to make up for past omissions.
When Alison was born in 1969 her family lived next door to us in Chestnut Grove, where they stayed for many years before moving to a slightly larger property around the corner in Worple Road. Even as a very small child she exhibited that lovable cheekiness which was to stay with her and become her trademark in later life. I recall one evening enjoying a pint at the Victoria Tavern with her older brother Ian and a few other local guys when Alison, then probably about fifteen, came into the pub and stood defiantly with us. Ian, very much a youngster himself at the time, did not want his kid sister with him, cramping his style. "I know you want me to leave," announced Alison, sensing his discomfort. "It's going to cost you a pound."
Alison left the pub very shortly afterwards, a pound richer.
Despite knowing of her illness (she was diagnosed in her twenties with cardiomyopathy - an enlarged heart), Alison was always chirpy and invariably raised the spirits of all those in her company. She could be as blunt and impudent as she liked without any fear that anybody would take offence. The style of delivery was perfected in such a way that anything she said was accepted with good humour, and raised a laugh.
It is always, naturally, done to say nice things about somebody who has passed and to comment upon how unique and special they were. This to some extent makes it more difficult for me stress convincingly how unique and special Alison really was. And yet, reflecting upon those all around who are still with us (as one invariably does at such times), I can think of nobody around me who replicates or replaces Alison's own unique qualities.
Any who would challenge this only have to consider the size of the crowd that turned out at Mortlake Crematorium for Alison's funeral. Several hundred people lined the route to the chapel. Only the lucky ones actually got in, many more took part in the proceedings as best they could from outside. Friends from around Isleworth, people I knew but had no idea that Alison was close to also, people from my old primary school and elsewhere from my dim and distant past, old neighbours and current neighbours, even one of my cousins - from Hanworth - was there. It seems that Alison was a part of almost everybody's life in this community.
I doubt whether there is a single politician or "face" who graces the pages of our local newspapers from one week to the next whose passing would be marked by so many people. We will always remember Alison with fondness, but beyond that it would pay us to remember that this world is made what is by people, often unsung, and not just those of us more given to singing our own praises.
Amazing what a short report on this humble blog can do, isn't it?
It just HAD to happen, didn't it? Ann K££n, alleged Member of Parliament for Brentford & Isleworth and her Hounslow Labour Party are now the champions of the residents who are suffering the effects of the Mogden Pong!
On her website, Ann calls upon Thames Water "to look again at the possibility of covering the controversial Mogden storm tanks as the Brentford sewer treatment works looks set to expand."
It would seem almost churlish under the circumstances to point out to her and her colleagues that the Mogden plant is actually in Isleworth!
She continues: "A lot of people are very unhappy about the plans to expand Mogden but, by increasing capacity, this might be one way to help reduce the smells." Which she HAS to say really, considering it was her New Labour colleagues who drove the expansion proposal through the meeting of the Sustainable Development Committee at which it was passed!
Also interesting is her inference that she persuaded OFWAT to release "£60m" for works already undertaken. Which begs me to ask, as only £40m was ever spent, what happened to the rest?
People in my part of the world are used to this shameless, breathtaking opportunism as it has manifested itself so many times before in the run-up to elections, but how must those other, non-Labour members on SDC who allowed themselves to be talked around by Councillors Cadbury and Cooper in concert with officers from the Environment Department be feeling after reading this?
Yet another lesson in New Labour political chicanery ("We apply our own ethics") learned the hard way!
Tomorrow morning when I wake up I must come to terms with an utterly life-changing decision that I have been compelled to take.
Tomorrow I, an avowed carnivore throughout my life, will be going vegetarian, possibly for as long as nine or ten years without cessation.
Make no mistake, there is nothing I like more than a Lamb Jalfrezi, a Shish Kebab with chilli peppers or Chicken Piri-Piri by the pool in my Portugese bolthole. Like most people I dislike animal cruelty and have been known to boycott the odd product that had its origins in some barbaric practice. But I've always reassured myself with the thought that if God didn't want us to eat animals He wouldn't have made them out of meat.
But with my daughter Rosie having spent the last two years of her life as a vegan who doesn't eat vegetables, life has been a constant battle for Caroline and I trying to ensure that she gets all her nutrients and calories. Somehow, and I don't know how, she has managed to maintain an "average" weight for her height and has all the outward signs of being a healthy girl. However, when yesterday she relented whilst contemplating a plate of baked beans and told me that she would renounce veganism for vegetarianism if I agreed to go veggie too I had no option but to agree.
On the surface of it it seems very easy to be a vegetarian these days. Virtually every restaurant has vegetarian dishes and the days of having to survive on a diet of lettuce leaves and carrots are long gone. No so veganism - even today few eating establishments seem to acknowledge its existence and Rosie has often been stuck with a plate of chips while the rest of us tucked in to a juicy steak.
I've not the foggiest how I am going to cope with it, but I'll revisit it here for posterity sometime soon. Watch this space, and have pity.
If it seems like quite a long time ago that is probably because it was, but on Monday evening the Borough held its first ever RSL Tenants' Conference at Hounslow Civic Centre. In fact, neither the Chair of the event Paul Doe nor I are aware of anything of the kind ever happening in any other borough either.
About eighty delegates from seven leading RSLs attended, and following an interesting presentation from the Tenant Services Authority and a short Question and Answer session the meeting divided into several groups to attend workshops on various aspects of an RSLs work.
All in all a very fulfilling and useful event, and already looking forward to building on this pioneering work next year.
A big well done to all concerned, and particularly to Paul for having the courage to believe in his tenants and to spread his belief amongst the others he represents.
Caroline and I attended a nice service at St. Bridget's Catholic Church this afternoon organised under the auspices of Isleworth Christians (Churches Together in Isleworth).
It was headlined "A United Service of Thanksgiving", and was held to celebrate the 160th anniversary of the building of Isleworth Congregational Church, 40 years since the rebuilding of All Saints Church and 100 years since the building of Our Lady Of Sorrows & St. Bridget Of Sweden (to give it its full name).
Our Pastor, the Revd. Antony Ball, gave a typically inspiring sermon, contrasting the spirit of unity which exists between the various Christian denominations in the village today with the animosity which probably prevailed at the time of the respective Churches coming into being. He joked about Congregationalists rarely agreeing with other Christians and rarely agreeing with each other, but this light-hearted exercise in self-effacement actually conceals what I perceive to be the strength of the Congregational Church - its democratic ethos and the fact that it is run by the members. Indeed Congregationalism is not in itself a brand of theology, but rather a method of government. I like to think of the Congregational Church as the ICG of the Christian world!
Whatever the respective merits of the various denominations, what is significant about Isleworth Christians is that its strength and success lies in well-meaning people agreeing in good faith to be different together, in a way that recognises and respects the much more important things that we all have in common.
Anyone see where I'm going with this?
A massive well done to Brentford Football Club for confirming their promotion to League One as champions yesterday with an emphatic 3-1 win against Darlington, who had a man sent off after just ninety seconds. I'm pleased that I've managed to secure some tickets for the last match against Luton Town, who will also be leaving League Two - for the time being anyway - after finishing bottom of the table. Having sustained a 30-point deduction at the start of the season I guess they were never really going to finish anywhere else.
Today my son Joe also played his last league match of the season for Spartans 'B', in the Harrow Youth Football League. His team are the only 'B' side in Division Two (Under 12s), and they managed to finish mid-table after beating Pinnstars 5-3.
Taking the snap below of the players awaiting an incoming corner got me into a little bit of trouble when an over-zealous Pinnstars coach berated me for taking a photograph of the children! In this day and age - and I say this with great sadness - he probably had a point and I should have given the matter more thought, but I didn't like his manner and had to remind myself that I hold a position of responsibility and need to bite my tongue in situations of this kind.
Despite his comments none of the players in this small, grainy photo were facing the camera and I am cool about including it on this blog. Joe is the tall lad in the blue to the right of the Pinnstars forward.
Despite the gout coming back yet again with a vengeance I managed to stay on my feet for most of the day yesterday to tour the borough with Paul Doe, Chief Executive of Shepherd's Bush Housing Group (SBHG) and Chair of the Hounslow Housing Association Forum.
Shepherd's Bush is one of the larger Registered Social Landlords (RSLs) and it owns a diverse portfolio of properties around the borough from individual, restored street properties, through small isolated schemes comprising a dozen or so units, to medium-sized stand-alone developments. In my own back yard SBHG manages a major chunk of the Smallberry Green estate, in Syon ward.
It would be fair to say - and I did say it to Paul at the first opportunity - that my initial experience of RSLs in this borough left me somewhat unimpressed. Indeed it wouldn't be too much of an exaggeration to suggest that it left me emotionally scarred. As a tenant myself living on Isleworth's West Middlesex estate I spent the first seven or so years trying to make meaningful contact with my landlords to point out to them that the contractor responsibile for putting the buildings up had omitted to install any soundproofing. Three of these valuable years were used up trying to teach them, ultimately to no avail, how to respond to an e-mail.
When I did finally establish proper contact with somebody capable of communicating in polysyllables I spent the next couple of years trying to coax them out of a perpetual state of knee-jerk denial. Many arguments were had, and an embarrassingly fraudulent sound attenuation survey was even conducted to "confirm" the existence of visibly non-existent soundproofing as part of an overall strategy clearly designed to wear us down into silence.
The tragedy of it all was that our landlords had an agreement with their contractor that any faults reported within ten years from the date of construction would be put right at no cost to themselves. Had they worked with us rather than argued with us, they could have compelled the contractor who had ripped them off with substandard work to come back and finish the job gratis, thereby improving the quality of their stock.
The efforts of tenants to launch and sustain a successful residents' association encountered similarly insurmountable obstacles. Earlier in the process there was the usual attempt to politicise us, and when that fell flat due to the vigilance of residents the estate's three landlords all quickly lost interest in supporting us. The community centre ended up as a private nursery for well-healed residents from off the estate, for which payment is extracted both from hirers in the form of a usage charge and - simultaneously - from tenants of the estate who are no longer able to use the premises through service charges.
Shepherd's Bush Housing Group is clearly of an altogether different mindset. Indeed in the field of tenant engagement - in service management as well as simply in community life - it is in many respects ahead of us at the local authority. Paul understood - I mean he already understood, he didn't require me to tell him - that getting tenants involved in such areas as quality control and reporting problems and issues can save the landlord money and enable it to deploy its limited resources more productively as well as being good for Community Engagement in a more general sense.
SBHG encourages tenants' associations, and has a tenants' forum which it funds and supports. Where the establishment of an association isn't feasible, it has a network of Tenant Monitors, three of whom I had the privilege of meeting at schemes in Hounslow and Bedfont. Tenants help to produce the Group's publication and website, and SBHG is currently looking into the viability of creating an e-mail forum for those residents who wish, or are compelled by their lifestyle, to engage differently.
All members of staff employed by SBHG must meet at least four residents in their natural habitat, reminding them in dramatic style of the raison d'etre of a housing provider. And Paul himself hosts a number of "Meet the Chief Executive" meetings, where tenants can come along and ask questions, provide information or simply let of steam according to their wont.
On Monday afternoon I will be attending the borough's first RSL Conference at Hounslow Civic Centre. As the need for social housing becomes ever more acute the RSLs will play an increasingly important role in helping us to bring it about. There has never been a more important time for us and them to find out a little more about how each other works.
