It’s a man’s world (again)

30 Jun

The latest issue of the Newham Mag includes details of the allowances paid to the mayor and the 60 other members of the council in the last municipal year (April 2016 to March 2017).

Between them they pocketed over £1.2 million.

But that wasn’t evenly distributed. As you can see from the table below, those receiving most had one important thing in common…

Name Basic £ SRA £ Other £ Total £ Gender
R WALES 81,839 0 0 81,839 M
L HUDSON 10,842 37,735 0 48,577 M
I CORBETT 10,842 34,770 0 45,612 M
F HUSSAIN 10,842 33,735 142 44,719 M
A BAIKIE 10,842 33,735 0 44,577 M
K CLARK 10,842 33,735 0 44,577 M
R CRAWFORD 10,842 33,735 0 44,577 M
C FURNESS 10,842 33,735 0 44,577 M
A MCALMONT 10,842 26,988 0 37,830 M
H ABDULMUHIT 10,842 18,835 0 29,677 M
I IBRAHIM 10,842 14,553 0 25,395 M
L SHAH 10,842 14,056 46 24,944 F
T PAUL 10,842 14,056 0 24,898 M
Mas PATEL 10,842 13,991 0 24,833 M
T WILSON 10,842 11,698 2,079 24,619 F
S BRAYSHAW 10,842 13,494 0 24,336 M
D CHRISTIE 10,842 13,494 0 24,336 M
J LAGUDA 10,842 13,494 0 24,336 F
R TRIPP 10,842 11,807 0 22,649 F
R FIAZ OBE 10,842 11,698 0 22,540 F
S MASTERS 10,842 10,683 0 21,525 F
S PATEL 10,842 10,356 117 21,315 M
P MURPHY 10,842 7,872 0 18,714 M
A CHOWDHURY 10,842 6,747 0 17,589 F
F CLARKE 10,842 6,747 0 17,589 F
A EASTER 10,842 6,747 0 17,589 F
M PATEL 10,842 6,747 0 17,589 M
J MARRIOTT 10,842 6,185 0 17,027 F
T RAHMAN 10,842 6,054 0 16,896 F
U DESAI 10,842 5,623 0 16,465 M
K SCORESBY 10,842 2,249 0 13,091 F
W VAUGHAN 10,842 2,249 0 13,091 M
D WALLS 10,842 2,249 0 13,091 F
N WILSON 10,842 0 452 11,294 M
E SPARROWHAWK 10,902 0 0 10,902 M
O AKIWOWO 10,842 0 0 10,842 F
A ALARICE 10,842 0 0 10,842 F
J ALEXANDER 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
J BECKLES 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
F BOURNE 10,842 0 0 10,842 F
B COLLIER 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
J CORBETT 10,842 0 0 10,842 F
J GRAY 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
A GRIFFITHS 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
Z GULAMUSSEN 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
P HOLLAND 10,842 0 0 10,842 F
O KHAN 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
C MCAULEY 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
C MCLEAN 10,842 0 0 10,842 F
F NAZEER 10,842 0 0 10,842 F
F NEKIWALA 10,842 0 0 10,842 F
A NOOR 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
V OAKESHOTT 10,842 0 0 10,842 F
Q PEPPIATT 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
R RAHMAN 10,842 0 0 10,842 F
P SATHIANESAN 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
A SINGH 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
S THOMAS 10,842 0 0 10,842 F
H VIRDEE 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
J WHITWORTH 10,842 0 0 10,842 M
A ISLAM** 7,636 0 0 7,636 M
E ROBINSON* 2,711 1,125 0 3,835 F
           
Totals: 731,924 500,975 2,837 1,235,735  
  • resigned June 2016
    **elected July 2016

Tags: ,

Value for money?

24 May

By Iain Aitch

Is £4m per job good value for our money, Sir Robin?

The recent raids by HMRC at the London Stadium (Olympic Stadium in old money) may have had some Newham residents worrying about their £40m investment in West Ham’s new ground. The council tax-payer’s hard earned cash is due to be paid back over the next 40 years, but you may well wonder what we are getting for our investment, bar a few free tickets for Mayor Sir Robin Wales and his cabinet. 

With this in mind, I set about composing a Freedom of Information request, basing my questions on the promises made by the council. They were not forthcoming on the number of free tickets handed out, promising the information on the 100,000 promised would be made public at the end of the football season (which has already passed). 

But what was most interesting was the promise around jobs. The council promised up to 75% of jobs at the stadium would go to local residents. The reality is, ahem, somewhat different and wholly disappointing. The actual number is 20%. And full time jobs? Just 10 (ten). I make that 0.8% of total jobs at London Stadium. 

That makes £4m of investment per job. Of 1,207 jobs in total, this 10 is in addition to 253 Newham-ites on casual contracts. A pathetic return and, if chatter amongst old hands is anything to go by, this number may be reduced radically next season. 

You can see the FOI and stats for yourself here (HTML) or here (PDF).

Iain Aitch is an author and journalist who lives in Newham. He has written for the Guardian, Daily Telegraph, Sunday Times and Financial Times.

Tags: , , ,

Election 2017 – your candidates

12 May

The lists of candidates standing in the general election for the two Newham constituencies have been published.

East Ham

  • Choudhry Afzal – Friends Party
  • Kirsty Finlayson – Conservative
  • Chidi Oti-Obihara – Green Party
  • Daniel Oxley – UKIP
  • Stephen Timms – Labour
  • Glanville Williams – Liberal Democrats
  • Mirza Zillur Rahman – Independent

West Ham

  • Rosamund Beattie – UKIP
  • Lyn Brown – Labour
  • Paul Reynolds – Liberal Democrats
  • Kayode Shedowo – Christian Peoples Alliance
  • Patrick Spencer – Conservative
  • Michael Spracklin – Green Party

Tags: , , ,

Stand up to racism – public meeting

10 May

From Stand Up to Racism Newham:

PUBLIC MEETING

Defend EU Migrants – Keep Racism Out of the Election!

Tuesday, 16 May at 19:00–20:45

Stratford Advice Arcade, 107-109 The Grove, London, E15 1HP (nr Morrisons car park)

Speakers: Wiktor Moszczyński (The Three Million), Jacek Szymański (EU migrant), Nahella Ashraf (Stand Up to Racism)

Please “like” and share Newham SUtR facebook event here: Defend EU Migrants – Keep Racism Out of the Election

As election day approaches Theresa May is once more playing the anti-immigration card, while UKIP tries to outbid the Tories. Theresa May is aiming to push through her version of a “hard” Brexit with a crackdown on migrant rights and opposition to the free movement of labour. 

We need to make a stand against the anti-immigrant and Islamophobic rhetoric that has fuelled the spike in hate crimes since the referendum.

Stand Up To Racism urges everyone to use their vote against racism and scapegoating in the election.

Come to our meeting to discuss how we can help keep racism out of the election.

Tags:

Up close and personal

25 Apr

A recent Freedom of Information request to Newham council

From your Constitution, it states:

15. PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS – between Members and Officers

15.1 Mutual respect between Members and officers is essential to good local government. Close personal familiarity between individual Members and officers can damage this relationship and prove embarrassing to other Councillors and officers.

15.2 It is not enough to avoid actual impropriety. Members and officers must avoid any occasion for suspicion and any appearance of improper conduct.

15.3 Member and officers must declare to the Chief Executive any relationships with an officer, which might be seen as influencing their work as a Member. This includes any family, business or sexual relationships.

15.4 The Chief Executive will advise both the Member and the officer of the need to avoid creating any appearance of improper conduct on their part.

Please provide the number of relationships reported to the Chief Executive of Members/Mayor having relationships with officers with a grade of SMR1 or above in the last 10 years.

Please provide the number of relationships reported to the Chief Executive of the Mayor having a relationship with an officer in the last 10 years.

Please provide the advice given to both the Member/Mayor and the officer to avoid creating any appearance of improper conduct on their part.

The response:

1. Two.

2. Two.

3. Verbal advice was extended to the relevant parties to remind them of their obligations under Part 5.2 of the Council’s Constitution – The Protocol for Member and Officer Conduct.

Legal advice was sought in respect of the declarations made. We consider the advice extended to be legally privileged under Section 42 of the Freedom of Information Act.

 

Note: comments have been disabled on this post

Tags: ,

Broken promise

4 Apr

Screenshot 2017 04 04 17 10 06

The mayor’s 2014 manifesto

The Newham Recorder reports:

Free school meals for some primary school children in Newham could be under threat, a headteachers’ union has warned.

In a letter sent out on behalf of the Newham branch of the National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT) on Friday, parents were told “rising costs and a frozen budget mean tough decisions will have to be taken”.

Union officials wrote that the ‘Eat for Free’ programme was “unsustainable” in part due to a new “transparent” funding formula from the council – calculated on the number of children and meals served – asking schools to foot 60pc of the bill moving forwards.

“Schools will not be able to continue to provide free meals for all junior aged pupils unless the national funding picture changes, or the mayor decides to fully fund his initiative,” the letter stated.

The story quotes Forest Gate South councillor Dianne Walls, a former local primary school headteacher, expressing surprise “as a member of the council” that schools were being asked to pay anything at all.

Councillors kept in the dark, promises broken. I am shocked. Shocked.

Tags: ,

Early morning at Wanstead Park station

20 Mar


via Instagram

Tags: ,

Spin City

15 Mar

Mayoral ally and ‘full-time’ councillor Clive Furness has circulated his Councillor’s Report for March to local members in Canning Town North. The headline item is the recent expulsion/long-term suspension of Cllr Obaid Khan.

After rehashing the Labour group statement he has a pop at his former friend and colleague:

He has begun a disinformation campaign supported by several councillors and members in which he claims to be the victim. We should have been put on notice after the last council elections when he was arrested for fighting with opposition members at the polling station.

That’s not quite how things went down at the time, when Khan was treated as something of a hero.

Sir Robin personally bought him a new shirt to replace the one that got ripped in the fight, which he presented at the Labour victory party after Khan had been released from police cells. The mayor praised him mightily for his commitment to the cause.

And who was it, just a few weeks later, that held the mayor back during his infamous confrontation with the Focus E15 mums at the Newham Show, saving him from making a bad situation much worse? Cllr Obaid Khan.

Even by Newham Labour standards, this is an outrageous bit of spin.

Furness rounds out his section on councillor misconduct by stating with a completely straight face (link added):

Two councillors remain suspended, one pending the outcome of criminal proceedings and one awaiting action from the [National Constitutional Committee].

I wonder how he will attempt to distance himself and Sir Robin from these two when the time comes.

Tags: , , ,

Co-op cock-up

10 Mar

IMG 0137

Although you wouldn’t know from this picture, the second round of Newham Co-opertaive Party’s AGM was extremely well-attended. Indeed more people turned up than for the first part four weeks ago.

The empty seats were earlier occupied by councillors and others associated with Sir Robin’s faction on the council. They departed after a monumental failure of organisation left them without any candidates for the remaining positions on the local party committee. Even an excellent speech by Co-operative party general secretary Claire McCarthy could not persuade them to stay.

Perhaps it is for the best that Sir Robin himself did not attend. He would not have been amused.

Cllr Lester Hudson, who won election to be the party chair in February, was another notable absentee. He preferred the free food and drink on offer at the LGC Awards in London. So much for his commitment to an active Co-op Party in Newham.

The second meeting was called after the original AGM was unable to complete the full slate of elections. In order to ensure there was no repeat of the bad behaviour that marred part one, part two was overseen by national and London region party officers. The atmosphere was much improved.

Unlike at the first meeting, nominations and candidate statements were required in advance for each post. Candidates that had been previously been nominated had to re-submit. A fact that had evidently evaded the leadership faction, who found they had no candidates. Cllr Clive Furness did his best to challenge this on behalf of the absent Lakhmini Shah (who had stood for secretary) but his objection was briskly swatted away by the chair.

Cllr Aleen Alarice, Sir Robin’s candidate for treasurer in round one, was present but said nothing on her own behalf when her opponent Averil Donohoe was elected unopposed. John Gray (assistant secretary) and Alan Griffiths (membership officer) were also returned without a vote being required.

The only significant election was for secretary and Gill Hay won that comfortably over Neil Wilson. Cllr Wilson will have been consoled by his later election as social secretary.

There were no elections for delegates to the two constituency Labour parties, because of the investigation into the alleged attendance of unauthorised Co-op delegates at the recent East Ham AGM. The Co-op does not have any delegates in East Ham and the West Ham delegates only remain in place pro tem.

A significant source of power and influence within the Labour party in Newham has slipped from Sir Robin’s grasp due to an almighty cock-up. Further evidence, perhaps, that his regime is unravelling.

Tags: ,

Wrath of Khan

10 Mar

Cllr Obaid Khan, who was handed a two year suspension from the Labour party last week, says that he has been the victim of a political witch hunt.

In a statement he says

“I believe that I am being victimised for having political differences with the local Labour leadership in Newham, as well as asking for processes to be democratic and transparent in the local Labour party.

“I continue to deny the charges and I am taking advise on what further action is available to me. I do not believe that I have been subject to a fair process by any reasonable standard of natural justice in the way the Labour Party has pursued the complaints made against me.”

Cllr Khan claims that although he was initially suspended in December 2015 on the basis of his “behaviour towards other party members at party meetings and in email correspondence” he did not receive specific details of the allegations until January this year – 14 months later.

He further says that the investigation report contained material that was irrelevant to the charges and “gratuitously negative commentary by the party investigators themselves” which was prejudicial to his defense.

Two of the three complainants did not attend the hearing and were therefore unable to be questioned by Cllr Khan or his representatives.

Mr Michael Sullivan, a local Labour Party member who helped Cllr Khan prepare his defence and who attended the hearing, said

“I have a lot of experience of representing trade union members at employer’s discipline hearings and of representing people at Employment and Welfare Benefit Tribunals. I also have a Masters Degree in Law that I undertook when I was a trade union officer responsible for members’ legal cases.

“I can say that the way the case against Councillor Khan was prepared and conducted including the material unrelated to the charges against him that was permitted to be included in the case papers would not be permitted in an employer’s discipline hearings or any Tribunal; and certainly not in any formal court.

“I believe that the conduct of this case reflects badly on the Labour Party, which has fairness and justice among it’s core values”.

Whatever the nature of the charges against Cllr Khan – which have not been made public – the conduct of the Labour party appears to be highly questionable.

And local members might ask why this case has been dealt with ahead of that of Cllr Ahmed Noor, who was the subject of a withering report to the council’s standards board. Cllr Noor’s party membership has been in ‘administrative suspension’ for close to two years.

They might further ask why Cllr Khan’s behaviour warranted his expulsion from the party when the mayor and his chum Cllr Ian Corbett remain members, despite being found guilty of breaching the council’s code of conduct due to their aggressive and bullying behaviour.

Tags: ,

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →