Surgery, Canvass then Forest Walk

Busy day. Cycled down to my Newham Council advice surgery in Stratford Library then joined Forest Gate North ward colleagues for a local door knock. Which went well, I experienced a mostly very positive approach to Labour, which I think is down to the excellent local Councillors, Rachel and Liz. It was nice to get back campaigning after a couple of weeks off due to Conference and annual leave. The cleaning and communal repair standards of the housing blocks we visited was mostly good. 

Afterwards, since it was such a pleasant, warm and sunny day, Gill and I walked from home to Chingford through Epping Forest. We took the train back home and then had delicious pub grub at the nearby Holly Tree, where we came across other Labour folk including the very quiet and retiring, Cllr Alan Griffiths. 

A good day. 

1st Labour Canvass in Forest Gate North 2025

 

This morning I joined Labour colleagues for my first canvass of 2025. It was led by local Councillor Rachel Tripp and we were joined by local activists and later by Newham Mayor, Rokhsana Fiaz. 

I live near by and know this area fairly well. While there was real problems over parking control and Anti-social behaviour, most residents I spoke to were fairly satisfied with Council services and the social housing stock (nearly all Housing Associations) appeared to be managed effectively. Rachel was recognised by a number of residents as their long standing and active local Councillor. 

There was complaints about Council parking enforcement being too lax but other complaints about them being too strict. Perhaps then the balance is about right? One of the canvassers, despite wearing a bright red "Labour & Co-op Party" hat, was asked by a resident if he was a Jehovah witness. I had an interesting conversation with one resident, who admitted that she had never voted but she would consider doing so in the future. I gave my view that the powers to be had never wanted working class people to have the vote in the first place and if we did not use it then they will try and take it away. 

The cost of living crisis is still hitting residents and they are genuinely worried about the economy and public services. I share their worries but asked them to judge the Labour Government on what it does in the next 4-5 years and not in its first 6 months. 

Afterwards we went to the "Wild Goose" Bakery for feedback, coffee and gossip. It had been a good session.   

Next week we will be out and about in West Ham ward. 

Thank you!

 

My fantastic Labour Councillors for Forest Gate North (Rachel and Sasha) say "thank you" for being elected. Hat tip Rachel here. 

"It's now May the 17th and I feel like I am only now emerging properly from the post-election haze and back into something like normal life again. The last few weeks before an election are always busy with campaigning but this year's campaign was particularly short for various reasons.

Campaigning for an election is surprisingly fun. But it's also very physical work, with lots of walking around, carrying bags of leaflets, and a fair bit of tramping up and down stairs.

So Sasha das Gupta and I were tired but happy by the time it came to the count, the results were announced, and we were re-elected as Labour & Co operative councillors for Forest Gate North.

I'd like to thank everyone who voted for us. Being re-elected is a privilege, and not one that either of us takes for granted. We have knocked on almost every single door in the ward over the past few months and spoken to many people, and we'll keep on doing so during our term of four years. Big thanks also to those local Labour members who helped with campaigning, to our opponents, to the Council officers who worked hard to make the election work, including counting all those votes, and especially to all the residents who offered support and encouragement.

In the meantime, there is plenty to do. The problems with recycling collections seem to have abated for the moment, but the situation with so many missed collections was really not up to scratch at all, and is being taken extremely serious by everyone. Turn out was low across Newham (and elsewhere) and we need to keep on working hard to show how important local government is, and to encourage people to have their voices heard.

It is a smaller ward this time, with part of the old Forest Gate North having been carved off to create the new ward of Maryland. So we are now a two councillor ward, shortly to briefly be a one councillor ward when Sasha takes some time away from the role to adjust to another new role, of being a mother! During this time I'll post online about who is available and when, and will draw on support from colleagues as needed to make sure residents aren't left without representation.

This map shows the new ward and its boundaries. Some of you reading this may see that you were previously part of Forest Gate North but now you are not. If that's the case then it's been a pleasure representing you (and you can naturally carry on reading the blog!).

For those still within the reduced ward, I'll carry on working as hard as I can to promote everything about Forest Gate North that is so brilliant, to improve those things that aren't, and to help those who need it."

Full election results for all the wards are online here:

https://www.newham.gov.uk/council/local-elections-2022

Council surgery then double bubble Labour canvass (amidst the horror felt about Putin's War)

 

This morning I had my first "physical" Councillor surgery in two years at Stratford Library archivist room (a fantastic local history resource) then I joined a Labour canvass in West Ham Ward. While talking to residents about local issues they were also raising their horror at Putin's invasion of Ukraine. 

We passed our local British Army, G Company, 7 Rifles, Reservist base, on the Portway (bottom left). As someone who spent several years in the then British Territorial Army, during the 1980's, learning how to try and stop Soviet Union tanks invading Europe, I am to say the least dismayed that we now face a similar threat from the fascistic dictator of Russia, Putin. I am confident that the men and women of 7 Rifles and their comrades will do their duty and protect us from Putin's aggression. 

For once I did not pick up any individual casework (apart from general concerns about parking charges, recycling & ASB which I will feed back to Executive members). However, when cycling home I noticed that vehicles were parking and blocking any emergency vehicle access to the south entrance of West Ham Park (see bottom middle picture). I will raise this with the Park (run by City of London) and Newham Highways. 

There is also a live local issue regarding plans by the Park to build homes at the site of the former planting nursery. Our West Ham MP, Lyn Brown has asked local Councillors for their views on this issue. I will suggest we have a meeting. 

In the afternoon I joined Lyn, at a canvass session in Maryland, Forest Gate North with local Councillor Rachel Trip and activists. 

It was another largely very positive canvass for Labour. Rachel picked up case work on housing disrepair and I found more residents angry and disgusted at the dreadful aggression against Ukraine. 

Afterward we joined up with a Stratford canvass team and thawed out with hot coffee and treats provided by Lyn at a local café. 

Keep Newham Safe

Check out Cllr Rachel Tripp blog post on Newham Health Champions

"Why I’m glad to pay money for my parking permit"

Hat tip and written by my colleague, Cllr Rachel Tripp (media caption mine from Public Health England)

If you read this blog then you’re probably reasonably active online, and so you’ve probably already seen some discussion about the proposal that Newham should charge for residential parking permits. Apologies for the click-baity title, but I wanted to use this post to have my say: no one wants to pay more for anything, and I’m certainly not delighted by the difficult conversations and decisions that we will need to have and take over the next few months. But overall I do firmly believe that charging for parking permits is the responsible, moral, environmental, socially conscious and just thing to do, and I wanted to take a moment to ‘set out my stall’ as it were, and to go through some of the issues in a little more detail than, say, twitter, will sometimes allow.

Fairness

Administering parking permits costs money. We are moving to paperless permits (finally!) as part of the proposed changes, and this will help and will make the whole process faster and easier for residents. But maintaining the IT system, updating it, dealing with queries, updating the database, designing legally compliant bays, painting lines on the road, reviewing the restrictions, consulting on changes, this all takes officer time and money. And the bottom line is that without parking restrictions, the whole borough basically becomes a commuter car park for Essex and beyond.

I remember just before our RPZ came into force in Forest Gate North, my then colleague Ellie Robinson followed some intelligence about some cars for sale on roads including Capel Rd, Lorne Rd and Latimer Rd. Some investigation revealed an extraordinary number of cars, all parked up for days and weeks at at time, from a dealership outside London that was changing location. It had a gap between sites, had looked at whereabouts was well-located and with unrestricted parking, and moved all of their stock, entirely legally, onto our streets. I remember a resident reporting watching someone parking up outside her house, getting out their Brompton bike, and cycling off on it to the station. I remember someone telling me we were the only station between Southend and Liverpool Street with free parking on the roads. I remember watching when the RPZ came into force in Forest Gate South, in the conservation area, and seeing all the trades vehicles, lorries, vans, and second cars that people didn’t want to get permits for (or which they had sneakily insured in places with cheaper postcodes, and so COULDN’T get permits for!) moving from those roads up onto my road. Without borough-wide restrictions we were really just shifting vehicles from place to place, which wasn’t fair or sustainable.

So if we accept, as I do evidently, that we need to restrict parking in order that we as residents can use our road-space, then it is obvious that doing so costs money, and the question then is who pays for this.

Currently around half of Newham households do not have access to a car, so as things stand those people who do not have cars are subsidising those who do. As a council we apply all kinds of subsidies in various ways and places. We, the residents, collectively subsidise the council tax of people on the lowest incomes via Council Tax benefit. We subsidise the cost of feeding families through our free school meals programme, for example. A subsidy from people with no cars, applied to those who have vehicles, is not one that I feel comfortable with or think is right, whereas applying the costs of parking to those who have cars, and applying a greater cost to more polluting vehicles seems much more sensible to me.

Social justice

It’s common and usual to worry about the impact of new charges on people with low incomes. We wouldn’t be doing our jobs properly if we weren’t concerned about this. Any new charges will be imperfect (the structure of Council tax is infamously imperfect and rests proportionately much more heavily on the poor than others) and I do see the argument that some people on lower incomes will have older more polluting vehicles.

But overall, running a car costs a lot of money. As above, around half of all households in Newham don’t have a car. Some of those residents will live in the increasing number of ‘car free’ developments where they cannot get a parking permit as the result of a condition of their planning permission. Some of those residents will be people who have chosen not to have a car, as I hope more people will decide in future. But overall, the statistics on car ownership show that it declines rapidly with income level. Our very poorest residents do not own cars. In fact, our poorest residents are much more likely to live in places with the very worst air quality which is partly attributable to car journeys, and to suffer from the ill effects and ill health that goes with that.

Of course there will be individual people with individual cars and stories and situations. But as they say, the plural of anecdote is not data. For a quick introduction to some of the evidence on this, read this twitter thread: https://twitter.com/peterwalker99/status/1235533045832118272?s=20

If you’re really interested in finding out more about active travel and social justice, have a look at the brilliant work Dr Rachel Aldred is doing on active travel, or look up some of the articles our wonderful local resident Laura Laker is writing.

It’s very normal to charge

One of the very first lessons I learnt as a councillor was how emotional people feel about parking. This continues to be true, and continues to be very striking! The ‘first residential permit free‘ was a big pledge from the old administration, and one that lots of people feel strongly about, and I can understand why.

But actually, it is very very normal to charge for residential parking permits. If we look across London, Newham and Hillingdon are the only boroughs who do not charge for the first permit. We are outliers in this respect. The free permit is an anomaly. Cyclists who use a space in a bike hangar, where six bicycles can fit instead of one car, must not only wait for the results of a consultation to see whether there is opposition from their neighbours, but must then pay £36 for the privilege of using a mode of transport that improves their health and causes zero emissions. This isn’t right.

(Incidentally, I have been lobbying for more cycle storage, as I know myself how much demand there is, especially in Forest Gate. I will keep on with this, and will keep arguing for the bicycle hangars that I know many of you are requesting and waiting for.)

Some of you may have found, like me, that when you speak to colleagues and friends from other London boroughs, their reaction ranges from surprise to disbelief when you tell them that the first residential parking permit in Newham is free. Some people I speak to literally cannot believe it. “What, nothing?! Free? For everyone? Why? How come?”

Public space

It is only through becoming involved with groups like Living Streets, who campaign for pedestrians, and also through an increasing interest in better public spaces in my councillor work and my role on the Strategic Development, that I have started to think in a more and more political way about our roads and pavements. Roads, especially in dense urban areas, are our largest public spaces. The area of London given over to parking vehicles is the equivalent size of the borough of Southwark.

Roads belong to all of us, are maintained by all of us, but have historically been designed around the needs of cars, with all other users squeezed in where space and traffic will permit. Modern transport planning recognises that you have to do things differently, and does attempt to address that. The London Mayor’s Transport strategy sets really ambitious targets for encouraging people to walk, to use public transport, and to cycle whenever they can. But the changes we’ve made and are making are incredibly modest and marginal, and in the face of enormous opposition.

There is no other public space that any of us expect to be able to store our property on. I would never think that I could store any item from my house on the road, except our family car. Of course I am not saying that roadside parking should stop. In Newham most houses don’t have space for off-street parking (and even if they do, we almost never grant additional dropped kerbs for access, as doing so damages the pavement, increases the amount of paving in front gardens which contributes to flooding, and also removes parking spaces from the street). But parking outside one’s house is, I would say, a privilege and not a right. Whenever I park my car in a bay on the road, I am using space that is ours, not mine.

Air quality

London’s air quality is an increasingly high political priority, and increasingly a cause for concern. I like to think I’ve always been worried about it, but have to admit my concern has got a little more personal focus since having a little girl who has suffered from breathing problems, since she was tiny. Last year I was very unwell with bronchitis, and developed a wheeze myself, and found myself dependent on an inhaler for the first time – an unpleasant reminder of how breathing difficulties can affect us all, and how much of an impact it can make on every day life.

I won’t go into the air quality arguments here as I know that the facts about Newham’s horrendous asthma rate in children, our rates of pollution, the early deaths that occur every year, the impact on the developing lungs of children… I feel like all these things are pretty well known. I see and of course agree with the arguments that some of the really significant contributors to poor air quality like the airport and Silvertown tunnel, won’t be affected by charges on residents’ cars. But these factors also do not mean that we should do nothing. Having other contributors to pollution in the borough is a reason for more local action, not less.

I also certainly don’t claim that emissions-based charges for parking permits will on their own tackle and improve our air quality. But this is a really vital piece of the puzzle. Alongside stricter planning requirements, alongside healthy school streets closures, alongside reducing short car journeys, alongside opposing the Silvertown tunnel, alongside increasing provision for cycling, and making streets safer for pedestrians, alongside tree planting and greening, green walls and screens, we also need to apply charges that are higher to the most polluting vehicles. Doing this is difficult, but it’s also right and fair.

Environment

I mentioned unnecessary car journeys above. No one can have failed to notice the extreme weather we’ve had recently: the weirdly mild winter, the increasingly scorching summers, the storms. It’s hard not to conclude that these are all evidence of climate change having an impact faster and more strongly than we anticipated before. We have declared a climate emergency in Newham, as have many other boroughs. I’ve said to my colleagues in meetings now twice, and I will say it again (lucky them): declaring the emergency is the easy bit. Declaring it is straightforward and feels good. Now we have to take action, which is harder. We have to begin making the really difficult decisions that will, together, help to shape a more environmentally conscious borough, and to make the kinds of behaviour change that will make a difference.

Ultimately we do need to reduce the number of car journeys. That doesn’t mean not using cars at all. Of course there are some people who will need to use cars more than others – in fact, promoting walking, cycling and public transport will actually make it easier, for example, for disabled people who depend on their vehicles to use the road, and to find places to park. There are many people who currently depend on the use of their car for work. But there are also huge numbers of unnecessary journeys. Just for example, there are a large number of very short car journeys made in our borough, and we need to reduce this number and to change how we move around. That’s not always going to be easy but it is going to be necessary.

Not about electric vehicles

This also absolutely is not about saying that everyone therefore needs to get an expensive electric car. Electric cars will continue to be free under these proposals, which I actually happen to think is not the right thing to do. There is still a cost to issuing permits to electric vehicles, which I think the owners of these vehicles should pay. And electric vehicles are not an environmental panacea: they still produce particulate pollution from their brakes and tyres, the production of these vehicles still has a huge carbon footprint, and the electricity they use has to be produced somewhere. Also, to really tackle climate change we will need to, as I was saying above, engage in some behaviour change, not just jump in an electric vehicle rather than a diesel one.  Electric vehicles represent part of the solution, but by no means a magical answer.

Going further

I know this won’t be popular, but I do also want to say that we could have gone further with out parking proposals. We could have, for example, limited the total number of vehicles allowed per household. We could have limited the total number of permits available.  We could have made the proposed charges higher! I know that the idea of charging at all seems shocking, but to my mind these aren’t, as the Newham Recorder and others have described them, ‘radical‘. Actually our proposals are pretty middle of the road (no pun intended) and normal.

In conclusion

I will press ‘publish’ on this post with a bit of trepidation. I already mentioned how strongly people feel about parking. When we introduced the residential parking zone across the ward I insisted on holding a residents’ drop-in meeting, and pushed this through despite resistance from various quarters and colleagues. I don’t think I’ve ever faced as much aggression and hostility as I did at that meeting (though interestingly, when I spoke to everyone there individually, it became obvious that the mood was being dominated by one or two very vocal people and overall views were much more mixed and nuanced). I don’t underestimate how strongly people will feel about this issue. But, at the risk of sounding grandiose, I became a councillor to make the world – ok, specifically Forest Gate – a better place. I didn’t become a councillor for personal glory. I want to do the right thing. I do honestly think that this is the right thing. I hope that you do too, but if you disagree with me, I hope you do at least understand my view.

The consultation on our proposed parking charges can be found online here: https://www.newham.gov.uk/Pages/ServiceChild/Parking-Consultation.aspx

Please do have your say.

Two Walkabouts & Groundbreaking at TwelveTrees Park

Amidst the madness of the General Election campaign I have to get on with the day job. On Friday I went to meet Residents in Ibex House in Forest Gate with local Councillors Rachel Tripp, Anamul Islam and officers from L&Q Housing Association. There has been issues regarding the lift and fire safety. The tower block has 105 homes and at its highest has 12 floors but only one lift. This lift has been out of action on a number of occasions (sometimes over a week). L&Q are proposing to install a new lift.

L&Q also need to clarify that the cladding on the block is safe and there are a number of repairs that need to be carried out such as fire doors that do not close properly. L&Q have undertaken to send us (and residents) an action plan.

I must admit that I thought L&Q were a living wage employer but outsourced staff working at the block are only just paid over the legal minimum.

Later I joined the Newham Mayor, Rokhsana Fiaz, to the ground breaking ceremony at what is now called TwelveTrees Park which is right next to West Ham Station. This used to be site of a former Parcel Force depot and it is planned that just under 4000 homes will be built here. It is a partnership with Berkeley Homes, Peabody Housing Association and the Mayor of London. I hope that the new tower blocks will have more than one lift!

Finally, I met residents, Deputy Cabinet lead Cllr Shaban Mohammed,  local Councillor Pushpa Mkwana for an unannounced walkabout around Newham Council owned Gainsborough Estate in Little Ilford.  There had been a number of issues regarding minor repairs and caretaking. It is a marvellous red brick low rise estate. It was agreed that we would come back with repairs and cleaning managers in the next few weeks for a full inspection and draw up our own action plan.

I would like to thank Kate (and the other 2 residents) in Ibex House and Sonia in Gainsborough for their work as resident advocates. We need a Kate and Sonia in every block or estate in Newham to hold all landlords and freeholders to account. 

Is it time for a Progressive Alliance to defeat the Tories? Newham Compass with Neal Lawson & Sian Berry

While a very,very worthy aim I don't think it will work nor is it necessarily the right thing to do. What about a progressive alliance within the Labour Party instead?

But I hope to attend and listen to the arguments.  

Forest Gate North September Canvass & Street Surgery

Summer is now over and the never ending cycle of political campaigning and street surgeries continues. I missed a canvass session on Wednesday evening in my home ward but went out with local Councillors Rachel Tripp and Anamul Islam this morning (Sasha is on holiday).

Very positive response, in particular, local residents appreciated the support that their Councillors had given in opposing a recent attempt to close a nearby right of way.

I did not hear any mention of national party issues or Brexit. Mostly when you ask residents whether or not they support Labour they look at you as if almost insulted. "Of course we vote Labour!" (do you think we would vote for the Tories? one resident asked me today)

The Newham Council housing blocks we visited seemed in good order (well done to managing agents Swan Housing) but the L&Q Housing Association blocks had some shoddy bodged disrepair and a definite trip hazard on communal stairs. Cllr Islam will be contacting them with photos.

The picture on the bottom of the college (2nd left) is of a property I canvassed a couple of years ago. A young woman came out to speak to me and her front door slammed shut behind her. No one else had keys and I had to climb the wall into the garden to see if there was a window open. There wasn't so eventually we had to get the lock drilled and smashed the window of the front door for her to get in. I got a new lock fitted and she "sorted things out" with her landlord. Never a dull moment when you are canvassing. Thanks to retired caretaker manager (and Party member) Montrose Matty.

New CLP vice chair for campaigns Karl Lewis ran the board (told us who to contact and recorded information) while the ace campaigner of the day was Rachel's daughter India (Child Labour).

Anam, Karl and I went for coffee at "Freds" afterwards to gossip and chew the fat. 

Foxes, UKIP Switchers & New Eastenders - Forest Gate North Labour Canvass

After my Mobike UK adventure I joined comrades in Forest Gate North on #labourdoorstop.

It was interesting to be blamed for not stopping foxes getting into private gardens and then to hear a previous UKIP supporting family switching to being strong Labour supporters.

Anam and I had a great chat with a Bulgarian family who do want to participate in our democratic process and are of course they are the #NewEastenders.

The overall response was really good. So many say that the Labour Party is - their Party

Photo left to right: Me, Carel (our top branch secretary), Sasha Das Gupta (Candidate) & Cllr Anam Islam (Cllr Rachel Tripp was at a meeting with Newham Cyclists)

Forest Gate North Labour Dream Team 3 May 2018

This is the Labour Slate for my home ward, Forest Gate North, in the 3 May 2018 Newham London Mayoral and Council elections. All of whom, while we might not always agree on everything, are trusted friends and comrades.  

Forest Gate North Labour selects Sasha, Anamul & Rachel

A great picture from the end of last night's Labour Party selection meeting, where local members voted overwhelmingly to return their existing Councillors, Rachel Tripp and Anamul Islam, as candidates for the local elections in May. The vacant position was filled by Sasha Das Gupta due to the standing down of our super ace Councillor, Seyi Akiwowo.

I chaired the meeting and well done to the successful candidates and good luck to those who missed out this time.  

Evening Canvass and offering support by local Councillors to Residents in Forest Gate following tragic murder.

Photo Collage from an evening door knock and street surgery last month in Forest Gate North, London by local ward Councillors (Rachel, Seyi & Anamul) and party activists. This was a sensitive matter since the area had experienced what is thought to be a gang related murder of a young boy only a few weeks previously.

Local residents were obviously still very upset about what had happened but were appreciative of the Councillors for coming out to speak to them. It is actually quite an uplifting experience that residents we spoke to were still shocked but on the whole very positive about the area (the estate itself appeared to be clean, well maintained and also well managed. Well done Swan Housing). 

Former Olympic Stadium Stratford report by Cllr Conor McAuley to his ward

Councillor’s Report to Custom House Branch Labour Party September 2017.

Former Olympic Stadium Stratford

I have been approached by a few Party members concerned about the stories they have seen in the local press about the apparent loss of the £40 million Newham Council investment in the stadium, prior to West Ham United Football Club moving in.

Members have asked me how and why Council came to invest such a large sum of money in the stadium and is the money really lost?

There was extensive discussion prior to the Olympic Games in 2012, as to the future of the Stadium once the games were over. There were two extraordinary meetings of Newham Council in November 2011 and March 2012 at which this was discussed. (I was prevented from taking part in these debates as I was a member of the Olympic Delivery Authority’s Planning Committee and it was deemed that I might have a ‘prejudicial’ interest in the matter – so I took no part in the decision making).

Under the heading ‘Securing a Community and Regeneration Legacy for the Olympic Stadium’ members of the Council agreed to create a company ‘Newham Legacy Investments’ to which it would lend £40 million. This company would then enter into a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) with the Olympic Park Legacy Company for the purposes of managing the legacy of the Olympic Stadium and island site around the stadium. The £40 million would then be invested into this new partnership.

Outside of the Council there has been much debate as to why it was necessary to invest £40m into a stadium which would be used primarily by West Ham United, a wealthy Premiership football club owned by two multi millionaires.

The Mayor has argued ‘This is not just for a Premier League football club, this is for community benefit. If it was purely about the football club I could not justify doing this’.’We are not sacrificing anything for this. We are doing prudential borrowing but we cannot use this borrowing for anything else and it does not affect our borrowing capacity or what we can spend. It has no negative impact’.

He said.

"Of course this is not entirely true. We could have used the money to invest in other community priorities like social housing or refurbishing some of our now closed community centres (like the Upton Centre). Sir Robin was also quoted as saying; “even on the most disastrous figures, even if everything goes wrong we still make a profit on this. The risk is really, really minimal.”

So where is the money now?

It is shown in the Council’s recently published accounts as an ‘Impairment’ totalling £44.4m of a Long Term Debtor in one of the Council’s group undertaking, Newham Legacy Investments Ltd. 

‘These charges are subsequently written-off to the Capital Adjustment Account.’

The Mayor and one or two other councillors are arguing that an ‘impairment’ is not a ‘write off’ but they are contradicted by the very next line in the accounts which states that these charges are subsequently written off.

I am appalled not only by the loss itself but by the fact that we had to study the annual accounts to find this information.

Such a fanfare was made about the original investment, one might think that the Council was seeking to bury the loss.

It tends to remind me of the £4.3+ million lost in the Council’s investment in 2012 in the London Pleasure Gardens project that was supposed to animate the Silvertown Quays area south of the Royal Docks. The Council lost every penny of this investment and it even had to pay the winding up costs of the company.

As I understand it, Newham’s Overiew & Scrutiny Committee has never looked at this loss, so I doubt their commitment to look at the Stadium debacle,

The Council’s draft accounts will be discussed further at the Council’s Audit Board on 27 September. It could be a difficult meeting.

Frankly I believe the whole Stadium deal deserves a proper scrutiny by an independent agency. Perhaps Mayor Sadiq Khan can deliver this.

Cllr Conor McAuley

20/09/17

(John Gray - This is a huge issue also to my constituents - I posted sensible concerns about this issue by Cllr Rachel Tripp here"

"The Stadium Loan" and Questions to Council Meeting

See below today's blog post by Newham Council Cabinet member, Cllr Rachel Tripp, on the controversy regarding the "The Stadium loan". Also, my questions on this subject that have been sent to the Newham Full Council meeting being held tomorrow. 

"Rachel writes…Introduction

I want to write a blog post here about the Olympic stadium, because I want residents in Forest Gate North to be able to have one place where they could read the facts, and to know how they are being represented, all laid out clearly in one place.

Without wanting to sound worthy, I’m also writing this because it’s so important for public bodies and the people who work in them to be transparent. I am a cabinet member at Newham, and I take that seriously, but I am also one of your elected representatives in Forest Gate North, and I don’t feel I would be doing my job properly if I wasn’t always trying to be open, even when the topics are challenging and feelings run high.

Timeline

Last week (Thursday 7th September) there was a cabinet meeting at 5pm. That afternoon before the meeting, I read on social media that the £40m loan that the Council made to the Olympic stadium had been ‘written off’ and that this formed part of that cabinet report and was being decided that evening.

I assumed that this must be in the agenda item Medium Term Financial Strategy, a report which is regularly updated and sent to Councillors. This report gives a commentary and information about where the Council’s finances are.

But in fact the report that contains the reference to the stadium loan is not one that was on the agenda for that evening. It is in the Draft Statement of Accounts 2016-17, which is due to go to the next Investment and Accounts Committee later this month. The draft statement of accounts which contains the reference is here.

The bit of this report that is particularly relevant is on page 12 which reads, ‘Impairment totalling £44.4m of a Long Term Debtor in one of the Council’s group undertaking, Newham Legacy Investments Ltd. These charges are subsequently written-off to the Capital Adjustment Account (Note 26)’

I was extremely concerned when I read this, as were many other residents. This was the first time I had seen this kind of assumption made about the Olympic stadium loan.

The Council’s statements

The Council has subsequently released a statement which I will reproduce in full here, saying:

“The council’s draft accounts for 2016/17 were first published on our website on 3 July and were then open to the normal period of public scrutiny until 11 August. These draft accounts are currently with our auditors for their review. The finalised accounts are due to be considered at a scheduled meeting of our Investment and Accounts Committee on 20 September.

“Our draft accounts, which are subject to change and approval, show a prudent, responsible and regulatory compliant treatment of a Council loan related to the London Stadium. The loan is shown, for accounting purposes, as currently ‘impaired’, or damaged, due to the current financial performance of the Stadium. It is not a write off of the loan.

“The financial performance of the Stadium in its first full year of transformed operation is a matter of public record and it was widely anticipated that the first full year of trading would be particularly challenging. Newham Council is working with the Greater London Authority, the London Legacy Development Corporation and our other Stadium partners on a range of options to improve the financial performance of the Stadium. The future value of our loan, and its treatment in our accounts, is directly linked to that future performance.”

end of statement

Other information given to journalists said:

1. The £40m loan is a repayable one over 40 years.

2. The Mayor of London has commissioned an independent review into the London Stadium and that to inform this work, all partners in the stadium are looking at options to improve commercial performance.

3. There has been a successful summer programme in the stadium, including three major concerts and World Championship Athletics and Para Athletics.

4. Newham residents have enjoyed benefits as a result of the council’s investment in the form of ticket giveaways. This includes 5,000 free tickets to West Ham United’s Carrbao Cup game on 19 September against Bolton Wanderers. These tickets are being issued to residents through community neighbourhoods, community groups, a ticket ballot, and to volunteers and staff.

Other information

I have subsequently also been told that:

– impairment is an accounting term and is not a write-off. If a substantial loan were to be written off, it would come to Mayoral Proceedings, which is a public meeting with a paper.

– there is a precedent for this, as during the financial crisis, loans made by Newham to Icelandic banks were ‘impaired’ by 100% but were subsequently revalued as the position changed, and were paid off.

– there are commercial negotiations ongoing which are currently confidential, and more information will be released as soon as an agreement is reached.

What happens next

This information takes us up to now. So I also wanted to set out clearly here what I think should happen next.

Firstly, I’m surprised that this is the first we’ve heard that there was doubt about the value of the loan. Although I have heard various conversations about the profitability of the stadium, and ways in which this could be improved (the costs attached to moving the seat going is a relatively well known barrier to making money, just for example), previously the information about the loan has been what a good deal the Council has.

To summarise my understanding of this, we borrowed the money at a relatively low rate of interest, and have loaned it to the Stadium who pay us a commercial (higher) rate of interest. This means that we get back: the original investment, the difference in the two interest rates, the community benefits (community days, free tickets for residents) and also 30% of the profits in perpetuity. Although this loan has been controversial, I have always been assured that the terms of the deal were beneficial to us.

Secondly, I mentioned transparency above, and I think transparency is even more important when the topic is controversial. The impression given here, rightly or wrongly, is that the information has been hidden, and I think this is a great shame. I’m surprised that there wasn’t more explanatory text in the accounts document, and am even more surprised that the term ‘written off’ was used without anyone realising that if the accounts use these words, then residents reading it may – not unreasonably! – not understand the financial term ‘impairment’ and assume that the loan has indeed been written off. So I think we need more public information (where it’s possible to publish it, and recognising that commercial negotiations do sometimes need to be confidential for reasons that are entirely right) so that financial decisions and changes to financial circumstances can be not just published, but explained and understood.

Thirdly, I need to learn more about the loan, which increasingly appears not to be a loan at all but more akin to an equity share, despite having been consistently referred to as a loan. Apparently, the difference this makes includes the terms under which the interest is payable. Generally on a loan the interest is payable whatever happens. With our loan/equity share, I understand that interest payments are only made once the stadium is profitable.

Other considerations

For fairness, there are a few other things I need to point out which are points that have been made to me.

The investment that Newham made in the stadium was key in ensuring that it would become a multi-use venue in its own right, and not fail after the Olympics. Having a venue like this in Newham, bringing sporting and musical and other events into Newham, is really important to the borough and very positive in terms of employment, place-making, sporting opportunities, visitors, and much more.

Although no one else has made this connection, I also keep remembering the O2, which started life as the entirely ill-fated Millennium Dome, referred to with seeming certainty as a white elephant, but now reimagined as a thriving music venue. Obviously I understand that the analogy is not perfect, but it does show what can be done.

Also, I think it’s worth re-emphasising that since I have become a councillor in 2014, the Newham budget has been cut by around 30%. It’s difficult to overstate what an enormous impact this level of cuts has had on local government across the UK, and the signs of it are everywhere, from libraries closing (not in Newham, thankfully) to the increase in street homelessness. Local authorities are making commercial decisions and in many cases are making capital investments in order to secure longer term income so that they can continue to provide services.

The money invested in the stadium is capital investment not revenue, and was borrowed by LBN in order to invest. So while it’s still public money, and important to remind ourselves of the vulnerable people the Council has a duty to support, it’s not the case that, for example, ‘that £40m could have been spent on social care’. Also, the consultation that we held in the summer 2015 about makings savings was about cuts to our revenue, so this was absolutely not a consultation asking residents what they wanted to cut in order to fund the stadium.

I’m also reminded that previous investments the Council has made have been successful. The building at Dockside, for example, has risen in value significantly, whereas at the time the purchase of it was also controversial with strong feelings expressed against it in some cases.

Summary and conclusion

Overall for me the things that need to happen now can be summed up into: the ‘what’, the ‘how’ and the ‘what now’ . The ‘what’ being the money – when do we find out more, was it a good investment, can we be assured that the money comes back, what further information do we need? The ‘how’ being how this information was and is communicated, and the ‘what now’ being, well – obviously – what happens next.

The joint meeting of the Audit Committee and the Investment and Accounts committee (which approves the accounts) is due to take place on the 27th September. The Council’s statement above refers to the 20th, but this date has since been changed. I’ll attend it, and report back here as to what is discussed. This is the next important date, but it is not within this committee’s gift to ‘decide to write off’ the loan. The impairment is an accounting term which should reflect current financial values and assumptions, and should be a neutral not a political decision. It will nevertheless be interesting to listen to the discussion of the accounts, and find out more.

Along with all my colleagues, I will do my very best to get all the information I can, and will share whatever I’m able to. I have spoken to the Mayor already, and will do so again, and am going to sit down with my colleague Lester Hudson who is the political lead for Finance to talk to him. I should point out that although this blog post is mine (and I’m responsible for any errors in it) I am certainly not the only council member who wants to find out more. Here in Forest Gate North, we have a blog, and many of our residents are on social media, so it makes sense for me to share this here. Other councillors are doing the same things, but off line and in different ways.

As ever, I am happy to discuss any part of this, and will answer any questions that I’m able to. Please don’t hesitate to get in touch. I won’t release or leak confidential information but I will always be up front about what I am and am not able to share.

I really hope this post is useful".

Next my (John Gray) questions to Full Council

Stadium impairment & write off

Dear Kim (LBN Chief Executive)

This question is to Mayoral advisor on Finance Cllr Lester.

1. I am writing as a Newham Councillor about the “impairment” and “write off” of £44 million in (NLI) Newham Legacy Investments (page 12 in draft statement of accounts 2016/17).

I was very disturbed to have only found out about this while reading the accounts and that Councillors/Investments & Accounts were not told beforehand that there were any problems or issues with our investment in the NLI. Please explain why this was not done?

2. What is your opinion on our NLI investments and our potential liabilities? For example do we know how much money E20 Stadium LLP has lost this financial year, if so how much and what is the projection for year end. 

Have we made any other loans to the NLI or E20 stadium LLP ? If so what has happened to them. 

Including what has happened to our £5 million South Park investment and confirm that it has been invested in accordance with the report approved by the full Council.

Regards
Cllr John Gray

(hat tip picture Evening Standard)

Remembering local Nazi atrocity - V1 attack on Forest Gate 27 July 1944

Above is a picture collage from this evening's anniversary vigil to remember the victims of a Nazi Flying bomb attack on this day 27 July 1944 which killed horribly at least 38 East Enders (updated figure) at this very spot.

Forest Gate Councillor, Anamul Islam, read out the speech below, While Councillor Rachel Tripp read out a message of support form our West Ham MP, Lyn Brown.

We had leafleted the local area beforehand about the event and I was really pleased that a 80 year local resident, who remembered the atrocity turned up to point us out to the exact location of the attack and give us the copies of the newspaper reports in top left of college. Another resident offered help with the funding of a permanent memorial to the victims (what a good idea).

Many thanks to "E7 now and then" website for providing historical content and Councillor Seyi Akiwowo, for organising leaflets and publicity.

Cllr Islam "I would like to start in the first instance by thanking everyone for making the time to come to mark an important moment in our local history.

During WW2 Newham was one of the most badly damaged parts of London. The bombs came in two waves - the Blitz of 1940/1 and the V1 and V2 raids of 1944/5.

Forest Gate was less badly hit than other parts of Newham such as the dock area, but nonetheless we suffered almost 200 recorded direct hits during the Blitz and about 50 V1 or V2 rockets- but each one was far more lethal- killing at least 70 civilians in total.

This evening we remember the dead of one of the most horrific attacks- when a doodlebug struck the corner of Pevensey and Dames Roads, hitting a passing trolley bus. It was near Holly Tree pub- where we stand today- on 27 July 1944.

The bomb caused mayhem- just how much is unclear. There are no reliable contemporary accounts as the press at that time was heavily censored so as not to give too much information to the enemy.

The Stratford Express was the local paper at the time and was only able to report that a number of buildings close to a public house were damaged. The public house was not named.We know today it was the Holly Tree, where we stand near bye.

The account went on to name four passengers who were killed. It hinted that others were killed or wounded but did not give details. After the war official Air Raid papers named a further four people who were killed that night- almost certainly by the bomb.We know the names, therefore, of eight people killed but following the published memoirs of West Ham’s Chief Fire Officer, Cyril Demarne, we know that probably dozens more died that day as a result of a fascist terror attack. Fire Chief Demarne described the Dames Road bomb as ‘the most horrific thing I have ever witnessed’. His full memoire was published in 1980 by the Newham Bookshop.

It is doubtful that we will ever know the full scale of the death and casualty toll of this dreadful bombing. If there are any lessons to be learned it is that we should never ignore the rantings of seemingly mad fascists and racists, whether they wrap themselves in a black shirt or in the Union Jack. Now, just as then, the price we pay for liberty is eternal vigilance against racism and prejudice.

Let us never forget the dead of this awful bomb blast, or the lesson their destruction leave us.

We will now read out the names of those known to have been killed:

Gladys Blackburn, aged 39

Wendy Blackburn, aged 4

Abraham Ince, aged 76

Edith Tilley, aged 41

William Winter

Denis Barfield

Thomas Driscoll

Reginald Hillman

We will now have a minutes silence.

(note newspaper report that 34 bodies were recovered from bus and more victims died of injuries in hospital and this does not include those killed nearby in their homes)

Re-electing Lyn Brown in Custom House & Forest Gate

A great collage of photos from recent campaigning. Custom House canvass on Sunday morning with Lyn Brown (and Cara) as well as local Newham Councillors, Rokhsana Fiaz and Pat Holland.  Lyn had also been that morning to Ilford North with West Ham activists to support Wes Streeting.

In the afternoon we were in Forest Gate North, where we had the support of super walker, Cllr Seyi Akiwowo and 3 Young Pioneers, courtesy of their Mum, Councillor Rachel Tripp.

The support for Labour in our constituency is humbling with superb canvass returns, yet while we want our activists to go to the marginals, we are making sure that we do not take our support in West Ham for granted.

At the end of canvass in Forest Gate, we had the traditional warm weather canvassing icelolly feast. The Young Pioneers seemed very happy with this (especially when their Mum said she was now taking them to the local Park and swings).

On Tuesday evening Lyn was out again with team FGN in Lorne and Latimer Road.