This report from the House of Commons Council Housing Group, chaired by Austin Mitchell MP, slams "the grim failure of current housing policy reliant on the private market (which) reinforces the case for government to invest in first class council housing"
During the recent local election campaign our Labour opponents quite shamelessly, and shamefully, peddled the deliberate untruth that the Community Group had intentions to privatise the local authority's housing stock, even persuading one malcontent on the Ivybridge estate to circulate a leaflet completely inventing a meeting at which such a plan was alleged to have been discussed.
The facts, of course, are a little different. The "half-way privatisation" in the form of the Arm's Length Management Organisation (ALMO), Hounslow Homes, took place under the previous Labour administration, and when I chaired the Hounslow Homes Management Review in 2006/7 every self-interested tentacle of the local Labour octopus was deployed to resist any attempt by me to take the service back in-house.
Under the coalition administration the first local authority New Build (made possible by a long belated change in legislation) was authorised by the Executive at my behest in my capacity as Lead Member for Housing.
It will be interesting to see just how enthusiastically the new administration resists the trend towards selling off local authority housing stock.
Showing posts with label Hounslow Homes Management Review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hounslow Homes Management Review. Show all posts
Tuesday, 15 June 2010
Thursday, 21 May 2009
All change at the top
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.
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.
Friday, 24 April 2009
On St. George's Day and Every Day, Together is Better!
I have not long returned home from one of the most successful, innovative and ambitious events that I have yet attended in my capacity as Lead Member for Housing & Community Safety.
For me personally, the Better Together event jointly organised by Hounslow Homes and the Hounslow Federation of Tenants' and Residents' Associations (HFTRA) did not get off to a particularly good start. Despite me being Lead Member not only did I have no input into the organisation of the event, but somebody also forgot to invite me. It transpired, I have to add, that this had been a genuine oversight and as it turned out every councillor had been sent a last-minute "reminder" of an event which they knew nothing about, but I would not be human if memories of the Bad Old Days in which excluding ICG councillors was turned almost into an art form did not come flickering back at least momentarily.
But any lingering doubts were quickly dispelled as soon as I walked into the Paul Robeson Theatre in Hounslow Treaty Centre, where a hugely impressive crowd that included my friends and colleagues Councillors Jon Hardy and Paul Fisher was already gathering.The afternoon event had been masterminded jointly by the Tenant Participation Officers at Hounslow Homes and by HFTRA (chaired by Julie Brooker, pictured above). Its purpose was to bolster participation in the lives of our communities by hard-to-reach groups who, for whatever reason, often find themselves left out of the business of the established tenants' and residents' associations on our estates.
It has to be said that in almost every instance the exclusion of these hard-to-reach groups, in particular newly-arrived communities, is entirely unintentional. People new to our estates, to Hounslow and to the country may understandably feel overawed and a little reticent about joining their local tenants' group, which usually tends to comprise a relatively small number of people who know and have been working with each other for many years. For their part those established groups may desire to reach out and embrace those who are new to their communities, but are unfamiliar with the cultures concerned and sometimes do not know how. If this stalemate is not broken, the association soon becomes unrepresentative of the people it serves and seriously negative implications for Community Cohesion begin to develop.
So the purpose of Better Together was to try to break through those barriers by bringing
established tenants' leaders and representatives from hard-to-reach communities together, to introduce one to the other, and to celebrate - appropriately, on St. George's Day - our common citizenship and those things that unite us as tenants and indeed as human beings (please click here for some earlier thoughts of mine on this particular concept).As Lead Member I have long argued that a powerful tenants' movement on our estates and in our communities is singularly the best vehicle there is for improving Community Cohesion. People and groups of people who are unfamiliar with each other and possibly even a little fearful suddenly discover that the problems which concern them in their everyday lives are the same problems which concern their new neighbours. When residents are brought together to discuss these problems, barriers just disintegrate before everybody's eyes.
By some this message was never completely grasped. To others it represented a threat, because it meant that improved Community Cohesion came about only by virtue of an empowered tenants' movement, which has a propensity to ask awkward questions and to make demands that are sometimes incompatible with the path of least resistance and a quiet life, and always incompatible with the control agenda favoured by some.
What inspired, enthused and excited me about Better Together wasn't just the massive turnout (250-300 people), the excellent food or the wonderful dancing. It was the fact that here was a really radical initiative to empower tenants by aggressively promoting cohesion that had been organised by Hounslow Homes and HFTRA, not only without any pressure from me but even without my knowledge! It wasn't simply like receiving a surprise birthday present, it was the pair of socks that I'd always wanted.I cannot describe my feeling of sheer satisfaction at having witnessed such an event being driven by Hounslow Homes and HFTRA, two groups of people who had fought me tenaciously thoughout every minute of the Hounslow Homes Management Review in 2006 as I ploughed on stubbornly with my plans to improve and democratise the process of Tenant Participation in our borough. Back then some harsh words were spoken. I hope and believe that much of the innocent mistrust that had inspired the opposition to me back then has since melted away, but in the overall scheme of things that is not really that important. What is most important that even those who would still probably like to see the back of me next year are now singing from the same democratic hymnsheet. I feel I can declare with supreme confidence at long last that it is now official - working together really is better!
Wednesday, 28 January 2009
LBH gives £4m back to tenants
It doesn't feel like three weeks since I last posted on this humble little blog. Often when there is so much to do and so little time in which to do it one is faced with a stark choice - do I spend my time doing it or writing about doing it?
Anyway last night, at Borough Council, I did it. In the face of every conceivable obstacle known to man I honoured my promise to deliver £4m (that's £4,000,000) from the Housing Revenue Account (tenants' money) back to tenants, to do with as the tenants would want done with it.
In the first instance prudent officers variously suggested to me that £4m was too much money to be spending at a time of economic uncertainty, or too much money for one Lead Member (particularly, dare I say, a Community Group Lead Member) to be overseeing.
Then the Management Board at Hounslow Homes voted to ask me to reduce the proposed spend to £2m, and to place the responsibility for its allocation into the hands of the Board itself rather than allow tenants to set the priorities.
On Sunday an e-mail arrived from the Hounslow Federation of Tenants' and Residents' Associations (HFTRA), bizarrely arguing that giving tenants £4m to spend would in some way be to their detriment and urging councillors to reject the proposal. A short meeting with two HFTRA officers the following day allowed me to correct some fairly basic misconceptions (they had not been adequately consulted - lesson to be learned) and the Federation's objections were withdrawn.
On Monday night I had to run the proposals past our coalition colleagues in the Conservative Group who, not unreasonably, were very concerned about the other, less optimistic aspect of the HRA Budget Report that I was required to deliver to Borough Council - an increase in rent charges of up to 6.95%, forced upon us by the totally unfair and unreasonable housing subsidy system operated by the government. The system is highly complex and some were quicker than others to grasp that our hands really were tied in the setting of rent levels. Again not unreasonably in consideration of the ALMO's history, there was some suspicion that we were being "stitched-up" politically, and I have to confess that at the time I was a tad disappointed by the inference from one or two sources that I might not be equal to, or even aware of, such a challenge. However when I and my colleagues left the meeting the Conservative Group voted to support my recommendations in their entirety, albeit with some concerns that it will be my absolute pleasure to address, so I must have said something right.
Fast forward to a few hours before Borough Council, and a telephone call alerted me to some behind-the-scenes conversations amongst senior officers that could have torpedoed the Report still. I was able to speak to the Leader and another potential hurdle was negotiated successfully.
When the meeting was finally upon us I was unsurprised to learn that the Labour Group had submitted an Amendment accepting the rent increase but calling for the £4m spend to be placed in the hands of the Hounslow Homes Board and not the tenants. The Amendment was proposed by Councillor Matt Harmer, whom I like and for whom I have a lot of respect but who is still after all "one of the gang", and seconded by Councillor Elizabeth Hughes, who if my perception of body language serves me correctly dislikes me with a vengeance and whose main saving grace is that she isn't ex-councillor David Hughes.
I introduced the Report, declaring that the £4m project was an exercise in community empowerment, giving tenants a real say in how what is after all their own money is spent and in so doing honouring the Community Group's commitment to total democracy without which our presence on the council itself would have no meaning. I delivered the Report standing up in order to emphasise its importance. Points made but over-reliance on notes. As I sat down I awarded myself seven out of ten for delivery.
Then came the New Labour Amendment, Matt was very agreeable. As I acknowledged later in my summing-up, Matt is a very agreeable bloke. Indeed in the spirit of agreement, I will even plug his blog, and invite him to do the same for me in return (watch this space...for a very long time)!
His argument was simple - the Hounslow Homes Board had been elected (or in some cases selected by people who had been elected) and so had a mandate to spend tenants' money. I smiled patiently. I had been elected too. My mandate was to empower tenants, and that was what I was doing.
Then came Elizabeth. Elizabeth was worried that £4m was too much to take out of the HRA reserves at a time of economic uncertainty (rewind a few paragraphs if you feel you've read that before). Which was why she was proposing to give the Board £4m to spend from the HRA reserves rather than giving the same amount to the tenants. Elizabeth had given the game away.
There was more. Councillor Raj Bath, a Labour member of the Hounslow Homes Board (under the present administration council seats on the Board are allocated proportionately amongst the parties, under the previous administration they were all given to Labour - in many cases to ex-councillors whom the electorate had erroneously rejected), regretted the lack of "trust" allegedly placed in the Board by my recommendations and suggested that I (the Lead Member for Housing) was "interfering" in Housing matters.
His fellow Board Member Councillor John Cooper protested that Hounslow Homes had always worked closely with tenants (note to readers from Ivybridge - please don't stone the messenger, I'm only reporting what he said), ignoring the fact that it would continue to do so as part of the £4m project, and that the only difference was that the project would be tenant-led.
These were the points I addressed as I summed up. My closing remarks were cut short when the Chief Executive indicated to the Mayor within a nanosecond that I had had my statutory five minutes (please remind me to ask Councillor Ruth Cadbury what her secret is). Nonetheless the point was made, as was local history when Borough Council voted to approve the project (having already rejected the New Labour Amendment).
Lots of things, some of them regrettable, are said during the course of political debate, but one essential point needs to be made in the light of the comments that issued forth from the New Labour benches, and that is this. The handing over of £4m of tenants' money to tenants is not a punishment inflicted upon Hounslow Homes, neither is it in any way an expression of No Confidence in the Board. As Raj Bath rightly said last night I enjoy a good, friendly relationship with most if not all Board members. Even those who still use those Board meetings I attend as a platform from which to aim political barbs usually end up having a chat and a laugh with me after the meeting. To view the £4m project as a slight upon the integrity, expertise or capability of the Hounslow Homes Board is to miss the point entirely.
Empowering residents is my business. Empowering residents is the Community Group's business. Empowering residents is the Community Group's raison d'etre. It is what we do.
New Labour by instinct strives to keep power, training and knowledge as the preserve of a select few. Just as it did during the Hounslow Homes Management Review in 2006, it demonstrated last night that it still considers the Hounslow Homes Board to be operating within its sphere of influence. Whether the Board sees things the same way is a matter for conjecture, but in some respects that is irrelevant. What New Labour was doing was protecting what it perceives to be its empire. That its empire-building antics have resulted in it losing control of the local authority itself in no way deters the mentality from presenting itself at every necessary opportunity. New Labour is as New Labour does. It is the Nature of the Beast.
The biggest threat to the New Labour mindset comes not from any rival political party, but from those it needs to retain in a state of perpetual dependency in order to justify its own continued existence. That is why most of its members and followers will freely admit to detesting the ICG far more virulently than they detest their supposed ideological opposites in the political field.
Last night the Stone Table cracked just a little bit more. I make no apology for doing everything I can to reverse some of the injustices of the past, and hereby serve notice that there is plenty more to come.
Anyway last night, at Borough Council, I did it. In the face of every conceivable obstacle known to man I honoured my promise to deliver £4m (that's £4,000,000) from the Housing Revenue Account (tenants' money) back to tenants, to do with as the tenants would want done with it.
In the first instance prudent officers variously suggested to me that £4m was too much money to be spending at a time of economic uncertainty, or too much money for one Lead Member (particularly, dare I say, a Community Group Lead Member) to be overseeing.
Then the Management Board at Hounslow Homes voted to ask me to reduce the proposed spend to £2m, and to place the responsibility for its allocation into the hands of the Board itself rather than allow tenants to set the priorities.
On Sunday an e-mail arrived from the Hounslow Federation of Tenants' and Residents' Associations (HFTRA), bizarrely arguing that giving tenants £4m to spend would in some way be to their detriment and urging councillors to reject the proposal. A short meeting with two HFTRA officers the following day allowed me to correct some fairly basic misconceptions (they had not been adequately consulted - lesson to be learned) and the Federation's objections were withdrawn.
On Monday night I had to run the proposals past our coalition colleagues in the Conservative Group who, not unreasonably, were very concerned about the other, less optimistic aspect of the HRA Budget Report that I was required to deliver to Borough Council - an increase in rent charges of up to 6.95%, forced upon us by the totally unfair and unreasonable housing subsidy system operated by the government. The system is highly complex and some were quicker than others to grasp that our hands really were tied in the setting of rent levels. Again not unreasonably in consideration of the ALMO's history, there was some suspicion that we were being "stitched-up" politically, and I have to confess that at the time I was a tad disappointed by the inference from one or two sources that I might not be equal to, or even aware of, such a challenge. However when I and my colleagues left the meeting the Conservative Group voted to support my recommendations in their entirety, albeit with some concerns that it will be my absolute pleasure to address, so I must have said something right.
Fast forward to a few hours before Borough Council, and a telephone call alerted me to some behind-the-scenes conversations amongst senior officers that could have torpedoed the Report still. I was able to speak to the Leader and another potential hurdle was negotiated successfully.
When the meeting was finally upon us I was unsurprised to learn that the Labour Group had submitted an Amendment accepting the rent increase but calling for the £4m spend to be placed in the hands of the Hounslow Homes Board and not the tenants. The Amendment was proposed by Councillor Matt Harmer, whom I like and for whom I have a lot of respect but who is still after all "one of the gang", and seconded by Councillor Elizabeth Hughes, who if my perception of body language serves me correctly dislikes me with a vengeance and whose main saving grace is that she isn't ex-councillor David Hughes.
I introduced the Report, declaring that the £4m project was an exercise in community empowerment, giving tenants a real say in how what is after all their own money is spent and in so doing honouring the Community Group's commitment to total democracy without which our presence on the council itself would have no meaning. I delivered the Report standing up in order to emphasise its importance. Points made but over-reliance on notes. As I sat down I awarded myself seven out of ten for delivery.
Then came the New Labour Amendment, Matt was very agreeable. As I acknowledged later in my summing-up, Matt is a very agreeable bloke. Indeed in the spirit of agreement, I will even plug his blog, and invite him to do the same for me in return (watch this space...for a very long time)!
His argument was simple - the Hounslow Homes Board had been elected (or in some cases selected by people who had been elected) and so had a mandate to spend tenants' money. I smiled patiently. I had been elected too. My mandate was to empower tenants, and that was what I was doing.
Then came Elizabeth. Elizabeth was worried that £4m was too much to take out of the HRA reserves at a time of economic uncertainty (rewind a few paragraphs if you feel you've read that before). Which was why she was proposing to give the Board £4m to spend from the HRA reserves rather than giving the same amount to the tenants. Elizabeth had given the game away.
There was more. Councillor Raj Bath, a Labour member of the Hounslow Homes Board (under the present administration council seats on the Board are allocated proportionately amongst the parties, under the previous administration they were all given to Labour - in many cases to ex-councillors whom the electorate had erroneously rejected), regretted the lack of "trust" allegedly placed in the Board by my recommendations and suggested that I (the Lead Member for Housing) was "interfering" in Housing matters.
His fellow Board Member Councillor John Cooper protested that Hounslow Homes had always worked closely with tenants (note to readers from Ivybridge - please don't stone the messenger, I'm only reporting what he said), ignoring the fact that it would continue to do so as part of the £4m project, and that the only difference was that the project would be tenant-led.
These were the points I addressed as I summed up. My closing remarks were cut short when the Chief Executive indicated to the Mayor within a nanosecond that I had had my statutory five minutes (please remind me to ask Councillor Ruth Cadbury what her secret is). Nonetheless the point was made, as was local history when Borough Council voted to approve the project (having already rejected the New Labour Amendment).
Lots of things, some of them regrettable, are said during the course of political debate, but one essential point needs to be made in the light of the comments that issued forth from the New Labour benches, and that is this. The handing over of £4m of tenants' money to tenants is not a punishment inflicted upon Hounslow Homes, neither is it in any way an expression of No Confidence in the Board. As Raj Bath rightly said last night I enjoy a good, friendly relationship with most if not all Board members. Even those who still use those Board meetings I attend as a platform from which to aim political barbs usually end up having a chat and a laugh with me after the meeting. To view the £4m project as a slight upon the integrity, expertise or capability of the Hounslow Homes Board is to miss the point entirely.
Empowering residents is my business. Empowering residents is the Community Group's business. Empowering residents is the Community Group's raison d'etre. It is what we do.
New Labour by instinct strives to keep power, training and knowledge as the preserve of a select few. Just as it did during the Hounslow Homes Management Review in 2006, it demonstrated last night that it still considers the Hounslow Homes Board to be operating within its sphere of influence. Whether the Board sees things the same way is a matter for conjecture, but in some respects that is irrelevant. What New Labour was doing was protecting what it perceives to be its empire. That its empire-building antics have resulted in it losing control of the local authority itself in no way deters the mentality from presenting itself at every necessary opportunity. New Labour is as New Labour does. It is the Nature of the Beast.
The biggest threat to the New Labour mindset comes not from any rival political party, but from those it needs to retain in a state of perpetual dependency in order to justify its own continued existence. That is why most of its members and followers will freely admit to detesting the ICG far more virulently than they detest their supposed ideological opposites in the political field.
Last night the Stone Table cracked just a little bit more. I make no apology for doing everything I can to reverse some of the injustices of the past, and hereby serve notice that there is plenty more to come.
Friday, 25 July 2008
URA - One Year On
When I first took over the post of Lead Member for Housing, or half the post as it was at the time, my first challenge was to oversee the Hounslow Homes Management Review as part of the agreement between the London Borough of Hounslow and Hounslow Homes drawn up under the previous administration.
Whilst most people would, quite reasonably, have expected the main focus of the Review to have been upon such obvious matters as service delivery, my mandate as a community councillor was more about democratising the process through which tenants and leaseholders were able to participate in the management of their estates. Hitherto, of course, the ethos of the old administration had permeated Hounslow Homes and political allegiance had often been the criteria for determining which tenants could be part of the process and which could not.
The Review process was not a pleasant one. My political opponents recognised, as I did, what it was that was at stake and resisted it with all their might. It was probably the first determined assault made by the new administration on the values which had inspired the previous régime. Obstacles were thrown into my path from all sides which had to be overcome. House publications were mysteriously briefed, regional and even national newspapers launched personal attacks, and a question was even asked of the Prime Minister in the House of Commons! What the process had the effect of doing, however, was to exorcise the forces which had laid dormant within all of the inter-connected institutions and to draw them out into the daylight which they so feared. Once that had been achieved, they could be and were put to the sword with relative ease.
The inspiration for my conduct of the Review, indeed the inspiration for the ICG itself at least in its earlier years, came from Ivybridge and the problems which had torn the local residents' movement asunder. The whole ethical battle between the forces of cronyism and democracy had been fought out in microcosm on that estate for three decades. To a large extent those people who were running the old tenants' association at the time had merely inherited this culture and were not consciously advocates of it. But the damage had been done, and one of my first acts under the revised terms of the Management Agreement which I imposed was to try to bring the warring residents together under the umbrella of a new association which every resident had an equal right to participate in.
In July 2007 the former New Ivybridge Tenants' Association (NITA) and it's independent rival the Ivybridge Tenants' Action Group (Ivytag) agreed to simultaneously disband and a new association, the United Residents' Association of Ivybridge (URA), came into being. At the top table former leaders of NITA and Ivytag sat side by side. Tina Howe, the former Chair of NITA was elected to the same post in the new association.
Frustratingly, there were a few who saw my support of the new Chair as an act of betrayal. This small group, people who had previously been my allies in the struggle to change things for the better, were simply unable to comprehend that it had always been the principle for which I had fought, not the personalities. My quarrel had never been with any individual and I had never professed it to be, but only with the culture of cronyism which those individuals had inherited, and which had been actively fostered by the old régime at the Civic Centre and at St. Catherine's House.
So it was then that the URA was born, whilst a small rump from the former Ivytag (as well as one ex-member of NITA who was equally unwilling to embrace the unity concept) walked away. In an amusing application of the "any port in a storm" saying, the local New Labour Party against whose political interference Ivytag had been fighting since its inception, appeared to come out in support of the new (ex-Ivytag) rebels!
It was against this background of continued (although by previous standards much reduced) unrest that the fledgling URA had to operate. However in one short year the URA has already chalked up some considerable successes. A new safety fence outside Ivybridge Primary School, the removal of the illegal burger van which had squatted in the residents' car park on rugby match days, vastly improved communications between residents and Hounslow Homes, promised action against the nuisance caused by match-day chauffeurs and an impending £60,000+ bid for a play scheme project were all announced at last night's well-attended Annual General Meeting, which I had the privilege of chairing in the unavoidable absence of my friend and colleague Councillor Paul Fisher, who was himself chairing the Community Investment Advisory Panel at the Civic Centre.
A strong new Committee has been elected for 2008/09, and I have every confidence that this determined team will take Community Power on Ivybridge to new heights and set ever better standards. One pessimist in their midst complained that "only" 17 people had been elected to serve. It is easy to forget the days when the large majority of those who aspired to contribute towards the betterment of the estate were sitting on the outside looking in.
Councillor Fisher and I are always looking for fresh ways to boost involvement in, and the influence of, residents' groups around the borough and some ambitious ideas have already been actively discussed with officers of the Council. This space should be watched with some interest.
Whilst most people would, quite reasonably, have expected the main focus of the Review to have been upon such obvious matters as service delivery, my mandate as a community councillor was more about democratising the process through which tenants and leaseholders were able to participate in the management of their estates. Hitherto, of course, the ethos of the old administration had permeated Hounslow Homes and political allegiance had often been the criteria for determining which tenants could be part of the process and which could not.
The Review process was not a pleasant one. My political opponents recognised, as I did, what it was that was at stake and resisted it with all their might. It was probably the first determined assault made by the new administration on the values which had inspired the previous régime. Obstacles were thrown into my path from all sides which had to be overcome. House publications were mysteriously briefed, regional and even national newspapers launched personal attacks, and a question was even asked of the Prime Minister in the House of Commons! What the process had the effect of doing, however, was to exorcise the forces which had laid dormant within all of the inter-connected institutions and to draw them out into the daylight which they so feared. Once that had been achieved, they could be and were put to the sword with relative ease.
The inspiration for my conduct of the Review, indeed the inspiration for the ICG itself at least in its earlier years, came from Ivybridge and the problems which had torn the local residents' movement asunder. The whole ethical battle between the forces of cronyism and democracy had been fought out in microcosm on that estate for three decades. To a large extent those people who were running the old tenants' association at the time had merely inherited this culture and were not consciously advocates of it. But the damage had been done, and one of my first acts under the revised terms of the Management Agreement which I imposed was to try to bring the warring residents together under the umbrella of a new association which every resident had an equal right to participate in.
In July 2007 the former New Ivybridge Tenants' Association (NITA) and it's independent rival the Ivybridge Tenants' Action Group (Ivytag) agreed to simultaneously disband and a new association, the United Residents' Association of Ivybridge (URA), came into being. At the top table former leaders of NITA and Ivytag sat side by side. Tina Howe, the former Chair of NITA was elected to the same post in the new association.
Frustratingly, there were a few who saw my support of the new Chair as an act of betrayal. This small group, people who had previously been my allies in the struggle to change things for the better, were simply unable to comprehend that it had always been the principle for which I had fought, not the personalities. My quarrel had never been with any individual and I had never professed it to be, but only with the culture of cronyism which those individuals had inherited, and which had been actively fostered by the old régime at the Civic Centre and at St. Catherine's House.
So it was then that the URA was born, whilst a small rump from the former Ivytag (as well as one ex-member of NITA who was equally unwilling to embrace the unity concept) walked away. In an amusing application of the "any port in a storm" saying, the local New Labour Party against whose political interference Ivytag had been fighting since its inception, appeared to come out in support of the new (ex-Ivytag) rebels!
It was against this background of continued (although by previous standards much reduced) unrest that the fledgling URA had to operate. However in one short year the URA has already chalked up some considerable successes. A new safety fence outside Ivybridge Primary School, the removal of the illegal burger van which had squatted in the residents' car park on rugby match days, vastly improved communications between residents and Hounslow Homes, promised action against the nuisance caused by match-day chauffeurs and an impending £60,000+ bid for a play scheme project were all announced at last night's well-attended Annual General Meeting, which I had the privilege of chairing in the unavoidable absence of my friend and colleague Councillor Paul Fisher, who was himself chairing the Community Investment Advisory Panel at the Civic Centre.
A strong new Committee has been elected for 2008/09, and I have every confidence that this determined team will take Community Power on Ivybridge to new heights and set ever better standards. One pessimist in their midst complained that "only" 17 people had been elected to serve. It is easy to forget the days when the large majority of those who aspired to contribute towards the betterment of the estate were sitting on the outside looking in.
Councillor Fisher and I are always looking for fresh ways to boost involvement in, and the influence of, residents' groups around the borough and some ambitious ideas have already been actively discussed with officers of the Council. This space should be watched with some interest.
Sunday, 11 May 2008
£1.5m HRA Reserves Project launched at HFTRA Conference
A radical initiative to empower communities living on estates managed by Hounslow Homes was formally launched at the Annual Conference of the Hounslow Federation of Tenants' and Residents' Associations (HFTRA) today (May 10th).
The scheme will make up to £1.5m of capital money from the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) available to tenants' associations around the borough to spend on estate improvement projects of their choosing, which they will then take ownership of. The project is the first of what will be a series of bold initiatives to empower residents in the borough following the passing by Borough Council of an enabling motion which committed the new administration to a new way of thinking in the way in which we engage the communities we serve.
Delegates were asked to choose a name for the project, with the winner walking away with a £50 gift voucher. In the end we decided upon the Rainbow project, appropriate not only because of the colourful variety of estate-based schemes which will benefit from this allocation, but also because the award represents a pot of gold which awaits at the end of what has been something of a journey.
At least 200 people attended the Conference, and in spite of the rocky relationship which I "enjoyed" with Hounslow Homes and with some sections of HFTRA during my early tenure as Lead Member for Housing & Community Safety, and particularly while the Hounslow Homes Management Review was in progress, I have begun to pick up a real sense of warmth and of sincere affinity in my dealings with these organisations and the people who work so hard for them as they have come to understand just what it is that I am trying to achieve on behalf of our long-suffering tenants and leaseholders. Where there was once suspicion, if not in places downright hostility, a real united sense of direction and commonality of purpose has emerged in its place.
There are clearly still issues to be resolved before we can turn a very good service into a truly exceptional one, but just the fact that we know we are all striving for the same goal helps us to resolve difficulties as they arise. Exciting times.
The scheme will make up to £1.5m of capital money from the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) available to tenants' associations around the borough to spend on estate improvement projects of their choosing, which they will then take ownership of. The project is the first of what will be a series of bold initiatives to empower residents in the borough following the passing by Borough Council of an enabling motion which committed the new administration to a new way of thinking in the way in which we engage the communities we serve.
Delegates were asked to choose a name for the project, with the winner walking away with a £50 gift voucher. In the end we decided upon the Rainbow project, appropriate not only because of the colourful variety of estate-based schemes which will benefit from this allocation, but also because the award represents a pot of gold which awaits at the end of what has been something of a journey.
At least 200 people attended the Conference, and in spite of the rocky relationship which I "enjoyed" with Hounslow Homes and with some sections of HFTRA during my early tenure as Lead Member for Housing & Community Safety, and particularly while the Hounslow Homes Management Review was in progress, I have begun to pick up a real sense of warmth and of sincere affinity in my dealings with these organisations and the people who work so hard for them as they have come to understand just what it is that I am trying to achieve on behalf of our long-suffering tenants and leaseholders. Where there was once suspicion, if not in places downright hostility, a real united sense of direction and commonality of purpose has emerged in its place.
There are clearly still issues to be resolved before we can turn a very good service into a truly exceptional one, but just the fact that we know we are all striving for the same goal helps us to resolve difficulties as they arise. Exciting times.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)