Mr Cornelius, where is your moral compass?

Set out below is an open letter to Richard Cornelius. Why is it that, yet again in Barnet, it is members of the public who have to set the moral compass for those in leadership positions. Failing to act swiftly tells us a great deal about the people who are supposed to run Barnet on our behalf.

Dear Mr Cornelius

On Friday 3 May Councillor Brian Coleman pleaded guilty to the charge of common assault by beating of Helen Michael, in the High Road in North Finchley. Evidence from CCTV was shown in court and proved incontrovertibly that this incident was nothing less than an utterly indefensible act of aggression. It resulted from Councillor Coleman being caught parking in a loading bay, trying to evade the hugely controversial parking payment scheme he had imposed on residents in this borough.

Despite the fact that he has now been convicted of a criminal act of assault, Barnet Council has refused to comment, absurdly claiming that this is unnecessary as the attack did not take place while the Councillor was on council business.

Indeed local Tory members, including leader Richard Cornelius, openly continued to support their fellow member after he was charged, and were privately informing others that the story of the assault was false. Councillor Coleman was suspended from the party only after intervention from Conservative Central Office. Since the conviction, local Conservatives have issued no statement.

By his own actions Councillor Coleman has shown himself to be unfit for public office: such bullying behaviour, dishonesty and hypocrisy are not acceptable in an elected representative of the community. We demand therefore that he stand down from his seat in Totteridge, and that the Conservative Party expel him from membership.

We call on Richard Cornelius, as leader of Barnet Council, and on behalf of the Conservative Party in this borough, to apologise to Ms Michael, and to dissociate himself and his colleagues from this appalling incident. To remain silent is not an option: to remain silent is to condone an act of violence against a woman, and this was and must always be absolutely unacceptable.

Signed:

Derek Dishman

John Dix

Vicki Morris

Theresa Musgrove

Roger Tichborne

Brian Coleman is right about One Barnet!

Here is a joint follow up letter to councillors reflecting on the statement made by Brian Coleman yesterday.

Dear Councillor,

We wrote to you recently about the impending vote on the motion of no confidence in Leader Richard Cornelius.  We observed that there was a rising tide of concern in your ranks about the One Barnet programme of outsourcing, and we asked you to act to halt the negotiations for the privatisation of £1 billion worth of our council services.  Now your former colleague Brian Coleman, who has been a senior member of the Cabinet and exerted considerable influence within the party, has chosen to speak out against One Barnet in the strongest terms, calling for its immediate rejection.

In his statement in the Barnet Press, Councillor Coleman refers to the proposed outsourcing as ‘an officer-driven juggernaut’ backed up by a ‘revolving door of endless consultants’ with a ‘promise of savings’. By implication, Cllr Coleman does not believe that One Barnet will deliver those savings.

He proposes:

‘The council needs to dump this flawed scheme and introduce a proper strategy which assesses where services belong, whether that is the private sector, shared services with other boroughs, the voluntary sector or indeed occasionally in-house - a mixed economy is what is needed.’

We would give far more weight than Cllr Coleman to considering the in-house option fully as services are reviewed, but we are glad that he is prepared to voice publicly the idea that large-scale privatisation of services is not the answer to all our prayers. He is not alone in this; many senior Conservative politicians in local government are saying the same. 

He also says of his erstwhile colleagues:

‘I don't know any councillors who agree we should privatise the planning department.’

We invite those of you for whom this is true to speak out! We ask again: who controls the Council, senior officers or the elected Councillors?

We are pleased to see that at last a Conservative councillor is voicing in public the concerns that many of you have about One Barnet, especially since he has had to put aside loyalty to Richard Cornelius in order to do it. (Although, as he points out, Cllr Cornelius had become convinced that One Barnet will save money, he too was angered by the covert moves senior officers took towards adopting a Joint Venture for the DRS outsourcing.) 

Cllr Coleman has also put on record the consternation that many of you felt when Nick Walkley pressed the button on his ejector seat out of the Barnet cockpit. Of course, we have many differences with Cllr Coleman. For example, his suggestion that Conservative councillors have gone along with the One Barnet proposals because the unions had their own separate objections to them seems far-fetched. We find it hard to believe that the Conservative philosophy has as shallow a basis as knee-jerk hostility to anything the unions say. 

Notwithstanding that, and our very many differences with Cllr Coleman over the years, there is an indisputable truth in much of what he is now saying about One Barnet. It is only a pity that someone did not speak out publicly before! 

A glance at what is happening with the parking contract recently outsourced to NSL shows the dangers ahead if the Council plunges ahead with One Barnet. 

The parking contract has been in place for six months and NSL have still not got over their teething troubles; this contract was for £15 million over five years. If you scale up from a £3 million a year mess to £100 million a year how much havoc will be wrought in the lives of residents?

Opening his article, Cllr Coleman says:

‘Something has happened in the last few months in Barnet. Residents have been taking an interest in the way Barnet Council is proposing to operate in future, the so-called One Barnet scheme.’

He is right, residents are very interested in that, but it shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. Of course, like you, residents are concerned about the fate – for that is what it is – of their council services, and of the money they have paid out in taxes to secure them.

We hardly need to remind you that residents will also take an interest in who was in charge when their services were handed over wholesale to two large companies, and tied up in 10-year contracts. We all know who they will blame when the service delivery falls short of the high standards they have experienced up till now, or when there are contractual wrangles about service levels with the contractors BT, Capita et al.

Cllr Coleman suggests that Barnet Conservative councillors are behaving like lemmings heading for a cliff. That is not a very positive image but we have to believe that his comments do have some valuable insights and that there must be some truth in them that demand your urgent consideration.

We ask you now then to follow the instinct of your own common sense, stop behaving like lemmings, and abandon the reckless One Barnet programme before it is too late.

Yours,

Derek Dishman

John Dix

Vicki Morris

Theresa Musgrove

Roger Tichborne

Wow! Brian Coleman calls for One Barnet to be Scrapped

Today's Barnet Press has an article by Brian Coleman which calls for the One Barnet to be scrapped which I have reproduced below:

"Something has happened in the last few months in Barnet. Residents have been taking an interest in the way Barnet Council is proposing to operate in future , the so-called One Barnet scheme.

One Barnet, if it goes ahead, would fundamentally change the way the council is run. It is a New Labour idea - however, the concept of council, police, fire brigade, NHS and the voluntary sector delivering services jointly fell apart as the cuts agenda focused minds and turned opinion against grandiose reorganisation.
However Barnet Council ploughed on regardless of the changing political environment.

The opinions of sceptical Conservative councillors were brushed aside by promises from officers (and the revolving door of endless consultants) of massive savings.

The fact that most Conservative councillors had their doubts was lost as the trade unions bombarded councillors with emails attempting to protect their members terms and conditions. This campaign just drove Conservative councillors into the arms of the officers on the basis that if the unions were against it the scheme must be good news.

Council leader Richard Cornelius, a One Barnet sceptic, met with officers in January and the promise of savings seduced him. The rest of the Conservatives, including me, fell into line.

Then in August came the bombshell of a possible of a joint venture, something never mentioned before, and the leader of the council's anger could be heard all the way from his holiday home in France.

Then followed the unexplained sudden departure of Barnet's chief executive Nick Walkley. Why leave if One Barnet is going to be a stunning success?

Many Conservative councillors feel they are powerless to stop this officer-driven juggernaut or as one senior Conservative put it - we are lemmings heading for the cliff.

The council needs to dump this flawed scheme and introduce a proper strategy which assesses where services belong, whether that is the private sector, shared services with other boroughs, the voluntary sector or indeed occasionally in-house - a mixed economy is what is needed. For example, I don't know any councillors who agree we should privatise the planning department.

Conservatives are pragmatic and anyway the concept of One Barnet is fundamentally un-Conservative and ignores localism. It is totally New Labour, in fact.

The time has come to dump One Barnet and return to core local government values and make sure this particular turkey does not see Christmas!" 

 For such a critical article to be published just days before a vote of no confidence in Richard Cornelius is to be held shows what a mess the whole One Barnet outsourcing programme has become. It also indicates that Brian is not on his own in being concerned about One Barnet when he quotes his fellow conservative councillors as being sceptical. I noted with interest his reference to the views of councillors being "brushed aside by promises from officers and the revolving door of endless consultants of massive savings."

What surprises me most is why it has taken them so long to come to the realisation that this scheme is bonkers and that it risk the financial future of the borough.

Richard, do the right thing and pull the plug on One Barnet now.

Brian Coleman a combination of X Factor and Monty Python

I am a man who is not easily shocked but Brian Coleman's performance at the Budget & Performance Overview & Scrutiny Committee last night was breathtaking in the extreme. We had contempt, insults, denigration, sarcasm and offence in quantities and ferocity worse than anything the Simon Cowell, Gary Barlow or Craig Revel Horwood could ever dish out.  It left many incredulous and others shell shocked. I came away with the clear impression that Barnet Council was in meltdown, senior officers were intimidated cabinet members were humiliated and the gulf between officers and members is immense.

I won't go through the meeting blow by blow but I am sure my fellow bloggers will give much better accounts of proceedings. However I will give you some highlights:

Public questions: Mr Coleman clearly has no respect for members of the public. Each public question was treated with complete contempt, no sensible answer given, supplementary questions simply ignored. One person asked about the Council's "New Relationship with the Citizen". Last night demonstrated with crystal clarity exactly what that relationship is; disdain, derision and disrespect. Cllr Coleman might as well have just held up a sign saying P*SS OFF RESIDENTS because that is exactly how we were treated.

There was scrutiny of a report on Early Interventions for troubled families. Cllr Cornelius said that the hope was that by early intervention it would help people to lead better, happier lives. Cllr Coleman's response was "I don't care how people lead their lives as long as they don't break the law and don't cost anything". In other words stuff the disadvantaged as long as it doesn't cost anything. Alison Moore raised serious concerns that this was actually all about saving money and the cuts will make matters worse. Cllr Coleman grilled the officer repeatedly to the point that I almost felt sorry for him.

Robert Rams was up next. I had asked a series of questions about the wasted money on yet another consultants report. They have messed about for a year to come up with five options which we all knew about three years ago. Cllr Rams confirmed a response to one of my questions; yes selling off all the council's leisure centres is an option they are considering - People can exercise in the park if they want to get fit. Cllr Coleman ridiculed the outdoor gym equipment in the parks saying they were nonsense. I've used the equipment - yes me use gym equipment - and actually in Oakhill Park there is often a queue to use the equipment because it is accessible and free to use. In the future it looks like that will be the extent of leisure provision in Barnet.

We then had a long session scrutinising the budget holders. This is where Cllr Coleman wreaked revenge on his former cabinet colleagues. None were left off lightly. Sachin Rajput was on the receiving end of cross examination for a change forced repeatedly to confirm his confidence in his budget. Poor old Dean Cohen was challenged about the parking charges. Pam Wharf picked up the question about the parking budget and if it was under budget. "the account is in surplus". Ah ha, not what you were asked. Cllr Coleman persisted eventually squeezing out of Ms Wharfe that yes the parking budget was under budget. Oh dear! Dan Thomas really did take a beating and to be honest I did wonder at one stage it it was gong to come to fisticuffs. The animosity between Thomas and Coleman was palpable.

I had been trying to think what this meeting reminded me of and then it came to me in a blinding flash -  Monty Python's sketch "No one expects the Spanish Inquisition".

We then moved on to the massive outsourcing contract for development and Regulatory services. Cllr Coleman wanted to know whether the council were going to enter into a joint venture with bidders. Richard Cornelius looked pretty cross. I have seen no papers about a joint venture and I would need a deal of persuading. The question was asked again and again and the response was clear form Cllr Cornelius no decision has been made. Everyone in the public gallery was willing the Labour group to ask the question "well why did Pam Wharf send not one but two emails telling council staff they were going for a joint venture and why did Cllr Thomas support that view in the Barnet Press. Sadly the ball was fumbled and the question attempted by Cllr Mittra was not pressed home. Cllr Coleman made a defining, if somewhat crass, comment when he summed up Richard Cornelius' views on a joint venture, " If I were a gambling man, which I am not, I would bet the Icelandic Bank money on us not having a joint venture". In one move Cllr Coleman killed off any prospect of One Barnet being a joint venture once and for all.

It was clear at this stage the gulf between officers and Councillors is immense and on the One Barnet Outsourcing they are on two quite separate tracks. "Officers have been closeted with the bidders". That is a deeply unhealthy position and I think there is a very real risk that officers have become far too close to the bidders to retain their objectivity. Cllr Thomas said that a joint venture was the suggestion of the bidders. That should have set every single alarm bell ringing in anyone with a sense of objectivity and common sense but when you have such a close relationship with bidders perhaps certain individuals have lost sight of who they are supposed to be working for.

 The meeting drew to a close and Cllr Coleman was out the door. There were a lot of huddled discussions and a sense that something quite special had happened. I have a feeling this meeting will be remembered for a long time in the future and definitely not for the right reasons.

Barnet bloggers' open letter to council leader Cornelius: Sack Brian Coleman!

Dear Councillor Cornelius,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Signed:
Derek Dishman
John Dix
Vicki Morris
Theresa Musgrove
Roger Tichborne

Parking Chaos in Colemanistan

An open letter to Richard Cornelius, Leader of Barnet Council, and all Barnet Councillors

Dear Leader and Barnet Councillors,

On 20th March a document was placed upon the Barnet Council website entitled - Bittacy Hill_Introduction_of_Waiting_Restrictions - (http://committeepapers.barnet.gov.uk/democracy/reports/reportdetail.asp?ReportID=11110).

This document details the mayhem caused by the abolition of free bays in Controlled Parking Zones as part of Councillor Brian Coleman’s parking policies. This document details how the Barnet Police have had their time wasted, congestion has been caused, buses have been delayed, residents inconvenienced, and people’s safety has been endangered. In short, it is the most damning indictment of a Council policy possible. The background information section of this document says:

8. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

8.1 In June 2011 the Council completed a scheme whereby all ‘Free’ parking bays were converted to permit holder or paid for parking bays in the borough’s Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs). As a result of the changes made to the Mill Hill East CPZ, a proportionate level of displaced parking is occurring on both sides of Bittacy Hill on the outskirts of the CPZ boundary.

8.2 The council has been contacted by roads users and local residents, complaining of the congestion being caused as through vehicles are being obstructed by the displaced parking.

8.3 London Buses have reported to the council that the displaced parking is obscuring sightlines and obstructing through traffic, preventing their buses from gaining suitable access through the road, resulting in the delay of their services. They also stated that this situation has caused major congestion in both directions on Bittacy Hill and therefore, have had to temporarily put some of their buses on diversion.

8.4 In addition, the Police have also expressed concerns regarding this location, and have requested for waiting restrictions to be introduced.

8.5 Following investigations including site observations, Officers concluded that major congestion occurs on the hill at this location, and in order to keep traffic moving through the borough considered that the provision of waiting restrictions would be appropriate given the obstructive parking which is taking place.

8.6 Therefore, proposals to introduce lengths of ‘at any time’ waiting restrictions on certain lengths of Bittacy Hill including around its junctions with Bittacy Close and Engle Park, were designed in order to deter obstructive parking and improve traffic flow, sightlines and safety.

8.7 In anticipation of the statutory consultation, Mill Hill Ward Members were consulted on the proposals with all advising of their agreement and support of the measures for the area. In particular, Councillors Khatri and Hart stated that they had also received complaints on this matter or have experienced problems themselves. Councillor Hart did raise the issue that more restrictions may cause more problems to the wider area as did Councillor Schama.

8.8 However, Officers consider that any displaced parking that may occur as a result of the introduction of the restrictions can be absorbed into the local network with minimal impact.

8.9 In mid August it was necessary to introduce emergency temporary waiting restrictions on the eastern side of Bittacy Hill, as nearby Devonshire Road was closed to allow for essential maintenance works to take place, which resulted in an increased traffic flow on Bittacy Hill that exasperated the problems occurring at the location.

8.9 Traffic cones were placed on street to indicate the temporary waiting restrictions, and the location was monitored by Officers. Observations showed that displaced parking was minimal and what did occur had little impact on the area. It was concluded that the removal of the parked vehicles at this location was very effective in relieving the congestion normally experienced.

8.10 Additional supporting evidence underlining the concern via photographs showing buses being obstructed and the congestion experienced were sent to the council and a petition signed by all residents of Bittacy Close was also submitted, asking for waiting restrictions to be implemented at the junction of Bittacy Close and Bittacy Hill.

8.14 Councillor Khatri and Councillor Hart have since also reaffirmed their views and support for the proposals. In particular, they advised of their concerns regarding safety being an issue at this location. Councillor Hart also re-iterated his concerns for residents of Bittacy Close, who suffer from obstruction at the junction of Bittacy Close and Bittacy Hill.

Councillor Brian Coleman ignored all wise counsel in order to introduce these policies. He ignored all efforts to mitigate the problems caused. As a result, we have a situation where ever more parking restrictions will be required to fix a problem that did not previously exist. To what end? To inconvenience and overcharge local residents.

It is time for Barnet Council to have an urgent rethink. It is time to reinstate free bays, cut parking charges on Barnet’s high streets, and, most of all, it is time to put someone in charge of parking who is competent.

There is no way that Barnet Council can pretend that Coleman’s parking policies are anything other than an unmitigated disaster. Your own document says so in black and white.

Signed:

Derek Dishman
John Dix
Vicki Morris
Theresa Musgrove
Roger Tichborne

Brian Coleman abolishes pay and display parking in Barnet – bloggers call for Cabinet call-in and consultation

Joint statement from Barnet Bloggers

It has been brought to our attention that Councillor Brian Coleman has signed off, using delegated powers, a decision abolishing pay and display parking in the London Borough of Barnet. We believe that this is much too important an issue to be left to just one councillor to use delegated powers, and we call for the cabinet to call the paper in for review by the full cabinet.
The relevant report states that call-in must be done by 15th August. http://committeepapers.barnet.gov.uk/democracy/reports/reportdetail.asp?ReportID=10559The people of Barnet deserve better than to have such important decisions passed without debate. This change affects many residents, businesses and visitors to the Borough. We call on the cabinet to reject this change and follow the example of other Boroughs, where residents, businesses and other impacted organisations are properly consulted, before such changes are approved.

12 August 2011

Signed:
Derek Dishman
John Dix
Vicki Morris
Theresa Musgrove
Roger Tichborne