And the Spurs go marching on...

Yesterday night's result at White Hart Lane was altogether more satisfactory than Saturday's - even if it was hardly a vintage performance.

When the players came out, Everton's very purple kit made me wonder if we were actually playing Harchester United. Actually, some of the filming for Sky's Dream Team was done at White Hart Lane I believe, so wasn't beyond the realms of possibility.

As it turns out, Everton's purple kit is a big effort for charity, so well done to them. There wasn't much else for them to be pleased about last night

though, it was not a good game for them. Spurs ended up comfortable winners without playing at all well.

A few fringe players like David Bentley and Alan Hutton got a run out, and looked alright, but Roman Pavlyuchenko sadly wasn't able to take his chance to prove Harry wrong - surely nearing the end of his Spurs career now?

Couple of photos from the 2-0 win - the top one as the players were leaving the pitch (spot Fellaini's brilliant hair on the left) and the one below from during the match. Michael Dawson looking a bit despondent (maybe he's just seen Pavlyuchenko spank the ball wide) and Dan Gosling in the foreground showing just how purple the kit is.

So, we wait to find out who's up next in the Carling Cup - quarter finals at the start of the December. First though there is the small matter of a certain London derby on Saturday...

UpRise: SAVE RISE FESTIVAL

A campaign is running to bring back the Rise festival which Mayor Boris Johnson scrapped.

You can see a brief history of the festival here. But essentially the idea is a free music festival with a clear anti-racism message - a message which Boris Johnson removed when he was elected last year (is it really only last year Boris was elected? feels like a lifetime already). With a lack of financial support once the fundamental point (anti-racism) was cut out of the festival, Boris cancelled Rise completely.

The UpRise group are trying to resurrect the festival, with plans to hold it in Finsbury Park (one of its original homes) next year. You can visit their website and sign their petition here.

I only went to one Rise - in 2007 when I saw Saint Etienne and the Holloways perform, amongst others.

Haringey Leaseholders Association AGM

As opposition spokesperson on housing, I attended the Haringey Leaseholders Assoociation AGM last Thursday.

When the Chair Sue Brown opened the meeting, there was, unsurprisingly, a lot of talk about the digital aerials fiasco I gave the background to in my last post. The HLA's agreed motion called for an individual opt-out, block-by-block consultation and a cap at the London average, which must be retrospective.

For me, the two parts of that which will make the biggest difference to leaseholders are the opt-out and the cap - but as Haringey are now offering block-by-block consultation, that is of course an avenue worth trying too.

Labour Cabinet Member for Housing Cllr Bevan was not there, but was certainly mentioned - especially in discussion of his hazy recollection of the vote taken at the HLA meeting in February (see my last post).

Another big issue was raised too though, which I have not yet looked at myself since taking over as housing spokesperson in May. Leaseholders used to be charged for work (not just aerials, all sorts of building work) in arrears - I heard that it's not so long ago since the bills came in after completion of work and there was a two-year interest-free period on top of that.

Now leaseholders are billed in advance of the work being done. There is a three-year interest free period - although this does not compare well with neighbouring borough Islington where leaseholders have a five-year interest-free period. Bear in mind that these bills can easily be five figures and leaseholders cannot be expected to find, say, £20,000 lying down the back of the sofa.

The HLA passed a motion calling for Haringey's leaseholders to be given a five-year interest-free period to match that offered by Islington and for the interest-free period to be available for part of the bill, even if the leaseholder cannot pay the full bill in the three/five-year period. Let me explain that one - it is simple, but difficult to get across without an example:

Under the current system of three years interest-free, a leaseholder gets a bill for £20,000. They can afford to pay £5,000 a year, so it will take them four years to pay off. As this is longer than the offered interest-free period, they cannot take advantage of that and will pay interest on the full amount. What the HLA are asking for, is that the first three years payments (totalling £15,000) be accepted on an interest-free basis and the leaseholder only pays interest on the remaining £5,000 (not the whole £20,000) which will be paid back after the interest-free period is over.

These both sound like fair requests, which would make life a little easier for leaseholders - especially in these difficult economic times. We, as a Lib Dem group, do need to look into the costings and practicalities before we can commit to implementing them if we take control of Haringey at the local elections next May. A leaseholder at the AGM whose name I did not catch suggested the HLA finding out how much money the Council had made by switching leaseholder bills from arrears to advance. An excellent idea and one I will take up myself too.

I had talked to our local Hornsey and Wood Green Lib Dem MP Lynne Featherstone before the HLA meeting, as I knew she had been doing work on leaseholder issues across Haringey - including, but not only, the digital aerials saga. Lynne has been so concerned by the various individual problems with works and billing that different leaseholders have raised with her that as well as helping each individual case she has taken action at a higher level too.

Lynne has asked the Council's auditors to look at how Haringey charges leaseholders - to get to some answers on procurement and value-for-money, as well as the accuracy and fairness of leaseholders bills.

There's much more to come on this over the next few weeks and months I'm sure - watch this space...

Diamond-encrusted aerials, anyone?

If you live in Haringey then you will probably be well aware of the ongoing saga of the Council's exorbitant charges to leaseholders for installing digital aerials on their blocks - it's been a regular feature in the papers for months now.

You can get the general gist from just a few of the press releases here, here and here. And we have a petition you can sign too.

But, in a nutshell, the Council chose to install a very high spec digital aerial system (they do have an obligation to provide at least a basic digital aerial) and the costs to leaseholders have reached up to more than £1000 per flat - way above the London average. We have been calling for an opt-out for leaseholders who do not want the system, as well as a better value-for-money deal for the rest of us - council taxpayers pick up the bill for the other flats, of course.

As usual, there has been an unsurprising lack of consultation and a shocking attitude from the Labour Cabinet Member for Housing, Cllr Bevan. He stood up in Full Council earlier in the year and stated that the Haringey Leaseholders Association (HLA) voted at a meeting in February to accept the expensive Integrated Reception System (IRS). This is simply not true - as was pointed out to him by the person who chaired that meeting.

Cllr Bevan was at the February HLA meeting, but his recollection of the vote is strangely different to everyone else's. While he says that leaseholders voted in favour of the Council's plans, what they actually voted for was an opt-out for leaseholders from the plans (as we have also been calling for), which is clearly very different. This is confirmed in the minutes and also re-confirmed at Thursday night's meeting of the HLA - plus Cllr Bevan has been publicly corrected on it. But he continues to stick to his original story!

We 'called-in' the Cabinet decision to steam ahead with the existing IRS plans despite widespread opposition - the only concession they had made was admitting that their original procurement had been a failure on value-for-money and re-procuring to try and bring costs down. The Labour majority on Overview & Scrutiny voted against our call-in, but as a result of the meeting there has now been some movement.

There are now plans to do a block-by-block consultation to ask residents what they want - with the majority deciding which system to install. This cracks open a window of opportunity, if not fully, but falls well short of the opt-out that we (and the HLA) have been calling for. Most blocks will have a majority of council tenants, who don't pay directly for building works like this - so it would be understandable if the majority in most blocks went for the most advanced system.

Probably a better hope for leaseholders is belated talk from the Council of capping the costs to leaseholders. Other London boroughs have installed digital aerials at costs to leaseholders of as little as £75, with several boroughs coming in under £200. A cap at the London average could be the best way forward here - and that is what the Haringey Leaseholders Association called for at their AGM on Thursday night. More on that meeting in my next post.

Conservative smear campaign or just stupidity?

I've blogged before about my former Fortis Green ward colleague Steve Gilbert's campaign to be the first MP for the new seat of St.Austell & Newquay - which is where he was born, grew up, went to school, lives and works... a lot is often said about local candidates, but they really don't come much more local than that!

Well, speaking to Steve this weekend, it seems that the campaign by Caroline Righton (the Conservative candidate for the seat) has got nasty. She has misrepresented Steve - either deliberately or stupidly - in an email she has sent to local residents and also appears to have told a porky pie about her ability to check the facts of her story too.

Last Wednesday, both Steve and his Tory opponent had been invited to two different events - one a question time sort of radio debate, broadcast live on Radio Devon, the other a last-minute invite to a meeting about the regeneration of St.Columb, a key town in the constituency.

Now, Steve had been down to ask a question to the panel at the radio debate but took the view that the local issue was more important than getting a bit of exposure on the radio - so withdrew from that to go to the St.Columb meeting. The Conservative took the opposite view, getting herself on radio and just giving apologies to the local regeneration forum. I'll leave it to local residents in Cornwall to decide which approach they think is best.

But here's what Caroline did next. Like lots of PPCs, Steve uses both Facebook and Twitter to keep his friends and supporters posted on what he's doing. After that night's meeting he Twittered:

“stephen_gilbert was at meeting about regeneration of major town (declined by Tory PPC); Tory PPC at a publicity stunt (declined by me)....10:15 PM Oct 21st from web”

The next morning, Caroline Righton sent an email to local residents saying she had been forwarded Steve's Twitter update and including it... but look how it changed between actually being on Twitter and appearing in the Tory's email:

"stephen_gilbert was at meeting about regeneration of major town (declined by Tory PPC); Tory PPC at a publicity stunt (declined by me).... D***h***d!!!"

Now, that puts a rather different complexion on it. She goes on to say:

I was sent the comment below by a constituent who is privy to my opposition's Twitter emissions, which I am not. Apparently his asterisk'd comment is highly abusive.

She might not have liked Steve highlighting their different priorities when it comes to helping local residents or getting on the radio, but it is obviously an outrageous smear that she is telling people that Steve made an offensive comment on his Twitter - which is open for anyone to look at!

She also suggests that she couldn't see what Steve wrote herself, although the screenshot here shows that she has an account and that Steve is in fact one of six people she is 'following'. She has even Twittered herself about the radio debate that night. So it wouldn't have been hard for her to check her facts before she sent out this underhanded smear to residents.

So, what I think Caroline needs to tell us is if she knowingly lied as part of a very deliberate smear campaign - or was it just stupidity in adding in the rude word which presumably a fellow Tory and supporter added to Steve's Tweet (either as their own offensive comment or as part of a deliberate smear campaign)?

Steve's office has asked her to set the record straight with the local residents she sent this email to and to apologise for it - as, four days later, they have had no response, I think this deserves a wider audience! We'll hopefully get an explanation from the St.Austell & Newquay Conservatives at some point...

Just to be absolutely clear - you can see Steve's actual Tweet, timestamped, still there for all to see on his Twitter page here. No offensive language - that was added in by the Tories.

Lies, damned lies and statistics

By the final whistle yesterday, I was beginning to regret having said I would blog about Spurs after the match with Stoke was out of the way.

You can get a proper match report here. Having only lost to Chelsea and Man Utd this season before yesterday and sitting in third place in the Premiership knowing a win would move us level at the top, it was probably inevitable that Stoke would win.

The nature of the loss is particularly galling though. It's not that unusual to see a team arrive at White Hart Lane with the sole intention of defending and getting a draw - but Stoke actually started timewasting from the starting whistle. Let's just look at the key stats for the whole match:

Possession: Spurs 66%, Stoke 34%

Shots on target: Spurs 12, Stoke 2

We had seven corners too, but when was the last time Spurs fans could feel confident a corner might lead to a goal? Anyway, they are not stats that should have led to Stoke beating Spurs 1-0, but they did - due to a combination of missed chances, good defending and a couple of great saves from the Stoke keeper. We weren't helped by Huddlestone and Palacios being largely

anonymous in midfield - and particularly not by having to play for 20 minutes with 10 men after Aaron Lennon went off injured after we had made all our subs.

Jonathan Woodgate being forced off after 13 minutes on his return from injury was a nightmare - even if it did mean my favourite Spurs player Michael Dawson coming on to replace him and doing an excellent job.

The ref was poor too, Stoke got away with some proper muggings - for once, we needed a ref who was more protective. Having reeled off some excuses, I don't want to take anything away from Stoke getting a win on their travels. They arrived to do a job (defend), which on the whole they did well - even continuing to put 11 men behind the ball when we were down to 10 men and frantically attacking. And their goal, which on 86 minutes was their first shot on target since the opening minutes of the game, was excellently taken.

And Spurs didn't play well enough, consistently enough, to be able to win - even with all those chance. It was a frustrating game and not an ideal warm up for the derby match next weekend. With Robbie Keane ineffective again, you can't help but think if Jermain Defoe had not been stupid last week he would have been the difference between good stats and a good result this week.

Posting a few photos - Michael Dawson, Vedran Corluka and Benoit Assou-Ekotto amongst others - but taken on my phone rather than a decent camera, so they are gloomy and a little difficult to make out. Which pretty well sums up the match.

Hits and misses... but mostly hits

Leaving football aside until after today's match and skipping over the less pleasant things (like Owen’s emergency appendectomy*), theatre has as usual been accounting for a lot of what free time I have left after work and council.

I’ve been to lots of plays over the last six months, way too many to mention. Easily the worst was Punk Rock at the Lyric which had some inexplicably good reviews but was utter garbage. There have been one or two other stinkers as well, but all in all have seen some excellent theatre – just to mention a few:

• Eight at Trafalgar Studios (we’ve seen everything else in Studio 2 too, all very good – this was one of the best)
• Abigail’s Party at Etcetera
• Arcadia at the Duke of Yorks
• 2^nd May 1997 at the Bush
• Til I Die at the Old Red Lion
• Troilus & Cressida at the Globe – and The Frontline which got another airing this year

Anyway, you’re too late for any of those. One play we’ve seen recently which was very good and is still running is Speaking In Tongues. Seems that it hasn’t been all that well received and you can get tickets at bargain prices now – but it’s definitely well worth watching. Great performances from all four of the cast, which includes John Simm and Kerry Fox of Shallow Grave fame.

There have been gigs too, though not at quite the same rate as the theatre visits. The usual slightly random mix of music - Tracy Chapman, Maccabees, Art Brut, Manic Street Preachers, Take That, Jarvis Cocker… highlight has to be the Blur Hyde Park gigs (I went to both days), just awesome.

Also, although I started off my birthday last Friday by delivering leaflets in my ward, it finished more promisingly with Saint Etienne at Shepherd’s Bush Empire. Brilliant as always – and played one of my favourite songs, Hobart Paving, which I haven’t heard them do live before. Sarah even dedicated it to a Matt - ok, I wasn’t that Matt, but I got to be there for it anyway.

(*I'm not sure you would really get an appendectomy that wasn't an emergency - I guess it's like saying "necessary engineering works"... as if you'd be doing them if they weren't necessary)

Decent housing has to mean safe housing

I have already blogged a little about Monday night's meeting of Full Council. Not mentioned the failure to stick to an agreed ban on domestic flights, but you can read about that here.

I did do a speech about the safety of Haringey's housing, in my new (since May) role as opposition housing spokesperson. Have to admit I didn't deliver it very well... just wasn't feeling too great and so read out a speech I'd written beforehand, which never makes for the most inspiring listening experience. But the points I was raising were sound.

The choice to cover housing safety in our 'opposition business' slot was based partly on follow-up from the tragic fire in Camberwell earlier in the year. I met with the Council at the time and was reassured that none of Haringey’s blocks posed the same risk to residents. There are six blocks in Haringey recently named by the BBC as ‘high risk’, which are actually the top end of 'medium risk', having been scored by Haringey as 6 out of 9 - and I asked the Cabinet Member if there were any plans to reduce this risk further. Although he didn't answer that part, he did confirm that six more blocks the BBC said had no fire risk assessment in place - Cedar House, Daphne House, Kenley, Northolt, Reed Road and Trulock Court - had now been reassessed.

Homes for Haringey has also identified two additional sites which have some of the same design problems as in the Camberwell tragedy – some blocks on Campsbourne and Broadwater Farm. On Broadwater Farm, some original fire doors have been replaced by non-fire resistant doors - in some cases actually by the Council, according to a Homes for Haringey briefing, although this was denied by the Cabinet Member .

There is also an issue with escape hatches which have been blocked by residents for understandable security reasons (the idea that a fire escape which needs to be kept available should be through someone else's property does seem bonkers). I asked what alternative plans have been made to address this - as I asked a lot of questions during my speech, I have now followed up in writing with those that the Cabinet Member was unable to answer on the night, including if he will consider installing smoke alarms across all council properties.

I also covered the vast number of people Haringey is housing in temporary accommodation and the unsuitability of some of that accommodation. Picking out just a few pieces of casework involving temporary accommodation raised by my Lib Dem colleagues Cllr Carolyn Baker and Cllr Karen Alexander in Harringay ward, there are families living with serious damp, collapsed ceilings, mice infestations and inadequate security (other residents in the same block being able to freely access each other's properties). In addition to housing that is just not fit-for-purpose, repair work done also continues to throw up problems - with wires and pipes left exposed and some problems remaining unfixed for months or years.

The third area I talked about was how safe Haringey's housing is in terms of crime, in particular antisocial behaviour. As an example, my Lib Dem colleague Cllr Nigel Scott had told me about Bolster Grove in Alexandra Ward. There are problems with anti-social behaviour in the area, exacerbated by people hanging around in stairwells of the blocks and it seems that often the perpetrators are not residents there. So one obvious way of helping would be to install an entry-phone system. But when Cllr Scott asked for this to be done, he was told there is no funding for it – despite this basic security potentially making a big difference to residents’ lives.

Another example from Harringay ward – a resident in a ground floor property next to a public path, with broken window catches and so no security. She pointed this out to housing officers before she moved in, but they had still not been fixed well after she had moved in.

Basically, I said that no resident should be put at an increased risk of fire or of health problems through being housed by Haringey and no resident should have their chances of being a victim of crime increased through being housed by Haringey. That doesn't seem too much to ask, does it?

One of the biggest campaign issues since I became our housing spokesperson has actually been the installation of digital aerials. It might not be an issue of life or death, but is symptomatic of the way that Haringey treats leaseholders and is having a big financial impact on them and on local taxpayers. But I'll blog properly next week with the latest details on all that and what I have been doing on it over recent months - actually, was at the AGM of the Haringey Leaseholders Association last night.

In the meantime, if you already know the issue well from direct experience or from our press coverage, then you can sign our petition here.

Haringey Labour slow to catch up, as usual

You can see by looking at this blog post from February that in the Council's budget meeting the Lib Dem group proposed a freeze on council tax for the year - so that local taxpayers already hit by the recession (not to mention decades of Labour council tax rises) could get a little respite.

The Labour group voted against the freeze back in February. But, as highlighted by Lib Dem Leader of the Opposition Cllr Robert Gorrie at Monday night's meeting of Full Council, they have now decided a council tax freeze is a good idea after all...

... oh yes, council elections next May.

A Labour rebellion!

Last night’s Full Council meeting was more interesting than usual. A Labour councillor voted against the Labour line and with us Lib Dems.

That might not really sound very interesting – but it is the first time since I was elected in 2002 that any Labour councillor has voted with us instead of with the Labour group. It’s taken more than seven years, but I’ve finally seen some backbone! The only time that we’ve come close before was just before the 2006 election, when two Labour councillors (since retired) abstained on a vote, but that was in a meeting closed to the public.

It’s not that unusual to hear supportive words – indeed sometimes whole speeches that appear to completely support a Lib Dem motion or amendment – from some Labour councillors, but when the vote has come there has always been meek compliance with the Labour whip.

Maybe we should be grateful that at least one Labour councillor had the courage to stand up for a principled position, though of course it was not enough for us to win the vote. But the rest of the Labour group voted to wreck the motion we had proposed. What was this awful motion that they couldn't bring themselves to vote for? It was to support the campaign for a one-hour bus ticket.

The motion was timely, with Boris Johnson's public transport fare increases just announced. There are big increases in some areas, including a 20% increase in the standard bus fare, up to £1.20. As buses are cheaper than the tube, those who are already struggling and can't afford tube fares will be hit hardest by this increase. A one-hour bus ticket can help that - it simply means that you can change buses within the hour and not pay a second fare. So if your journey means, say, getting one bus for 10 minutes and then another for 15 minutes, you would just pay one fare - not two.

It was pointed out that people might take, say, a single bus that takes 45 minutes instead of two different buses that could cut the journey time drastically - because they currently have to pay for two fares. The motion simply called for us to support a one-hour bus ticket and condemned the fare increases . I believe a number of Labour groups across the capital have supported similar motions, but Haringey Labour chose to vote through a toothless motion which just made a party political attack on Boris Johnson instead - all well and good, but as usual with Labour we were left with all talk and no action.

One of the Labour councillors also failed to back a motion on climate change which the rest of both sides of the Council supported... not sure what was going on there.

Back with a not very Big Bang

The 125th anniversary of the beginning of space and time (sort of… see this article) seems as good a day as any to kickstart my blog.

I haven’t posted since just before the marathon in April. Don’t worry, I haven’t actually needed all that time to recover – though it was much tougher than the last two times, with age and fitness levels conspiring to give me a pretty torrid day on the streets of London. But, made it through to the finish line again and raised around £3200 for Refuge, so it was all worth it.

Right, back to the usual mix of council, politics, Spurs, gigs and theatre, with whatever else I can find thrown in….