Is Haringey Planning Incompetent or Corrupt?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by markb on January 3, 2014 at 10:48

"We get the chance to change every aspect of what they do and how they do it at almost every stage.  No need to wait for elections - there are mechanisms in place right now to correct wrongs but are you prepared to use them?"

How do we get to change 'every aspect'?  What mechanisms are these?  Please elaborate.

I'm asking because I genuinely don't know and although I vote - I don't feel represented - just disenfranchised (thank you first-past-the-post), so influencing change would be nice.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on January 3, 2014 at 12:49

Forgive me if you know this already...

The Council aims to act on behalf of the people who live here to improve things. The difference between the political parties is more a matter of emphasis than dogma, so if you help the Council get good stuff done and you're not of the same political party as your local councillor, it doesn't mean they've won you over - all parties want world peace. All parties want the poor to be better off. All parties want good schools and housing etc etc - what's not to like?

There's always a tension between what is decided locally and what Central Govt insist they have a mandate for.  

In the US, Marijuana is illegal, but in some states it's legal.  So it's both legal and illegal. The new US Marijuana shops can do a roaring trade but at more or less any time the National Feds can use their enforcement powers to not only lock local shopowners and customers up, but get every penny of profit back since the shop opening if the Govt goes all right-wing on the people (as it has before). They've forced the shops to only accept cash (the banks aren't allowed to offer credit-card processing), so the temptation to get them through their accounts is always going to be strong.

-----------------------------------------

I write all this stuff because to be of genuine help, you really ought to start by doing your homework as to what is possible for you as an individual to do.  One voice can change a room so, if you're up for it, you'll get a lot back.

-----------------------------------------

The national/local tension is one of the big forces acting to constrain what LBH can achieve. Another, for instance, is the cost of control - some are convinced that most of any savings made by Central Govt are lost in the costs of enforcing the rules and in the further 'hidden' costs of the effects on local people. Making it impossible for 'benefit scroungers' to live on their income by imposing taxes on them may cause them to loser their council flats, but what happens then?  The cost of the homeless is far, far greater, so the net effect can easily be higher than the headline savings politicians need to stay in office by promising cuts.  Meanwhile 'benefits scroungers' like the big corporates getting away with huge Govt-sanctioned tax breaks is far, far greater than any money central govt could now save by Whitehall strangling us in our beds.

LBH figures taken from http://www.haringey.gov.uk/index/council/haveyoursay/budget2014/our... 

LBH get half their money from Goverment, a quarter from business rates and a quarter from Council Tax. That's the pot of money to spend. 

A Cllr can't just go out and buy a load of stuff and spend it where they please - they don't have any direct control of any money at all.  No single Cllr can authorise spend - it all has to go through a committee (cttee for short) and that cttee is subject ot the scrutiny of a further cttee, and of central govt and residents. There are further complex sets of procedures to go through to get anything done, EU procurement rules for instance.

The is a legal obligation to publish every penny spent in detail (over £500) every month.

It is political - the current central government have cut some boroughs more than others. LBH say the cuts they will have to make this coming year are:

• Central departments by nearly £1.5m out of £29.5m (5.1%) through staff reductions, contract savings, reduced legal costs, better procurement and improved risk management
• Adults and Housing by £3m out of £92.1m (3.3%) through the rationalisation of support functions, staffing efficiencies, reductions in management, admin and non contact time etc
• Children and Young People’s Service by £1.2m out of £59.8m (2.0%) through non front line staff reductions
• Place and Sustainability by £2.2m out of £44.2m (5.0%) through reductions in staff, running and contract costs and as a result of increased income
• Public Health by £0.6m out of £17.8m (3.4%) through a reduction in overheads

A lot of this is ringfenced and almost everything the Council do has a lot of regulatory costs attached. Most of the money goes on the elderly and housing.

 

Now to the short answer to your question - most Cllrs publish their mobile phone numbers and welcome calls on local issues at any time (although please try to call during 'office hours' unless it's very urgent). Cllrs hold surgeries every week where anyone can go along and have a chat with one of them you like the look of to see what work you can do together.  

The big local decisions are taken by cttee and you can track that cttee and, if you have something material to say, address them by email or in person alone or in a group.  You can attend almost all cttee meetings now, and record them for re-broadcast on HoL. Through your local Cllrs, you can write to any official in the Council and get an answer - you can do it directly, or share the  answer automatically with everyone. You can join one of the many organisations fighting to right various wrings - the Council works hand-in-hand with some and ignores others at their peril.

The truth about your feeling of disenfranchisement is, with respect, that you simply couldn't be bothered.  Like most info, all this is only a google away and this site is full of relevant local issues and plenty of great people eager to go the extra mile and help you in any way they can.

All of the players in the Council and in the borough generally are able to be lobbied - you just go up to them and tell them what you want to tell them. They will change their minds if you convince them. Not all of them are easy to persuade, some appear powerful but are not etc etc.

The best way forward may be to track an issue that you feel you can make a positive contribution to and see how it pans out.  Here's one of the many I admire (DIY Streets, Turnpike Lane) :

Not sure it's good for the tree to have flowers around the base, but what do I know?

-----------------------

The Council Officials are generally amenable - technically some of them are not supposed to talk to the public but some are.  The planning dept for instance is full of experts who love the subject and have a detached view of the neighbourhood - they can give you chapter and verse and are literally open for a chat during office hours.

There's plenty more to say but it depends on you - the main thing is that there are many people out there who are actively involved in local issues and the wisdom is that, those who like it say they have a better life as part of the neighbourhood than as a transient stranger.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by markb on January 4, 2014 at 6:56

Thanks for the lengthy reply - I know most of the stuff but some helpful detail in there.

Earlier in this thread you replied to Patrick Grant "This is an insult to a group of people you seem to know almost nothing about. "  Quite right.  So, please don't assume that you understand where my feeling of disenfranchisement comes from and hurl the "can't be bothered" accusation at me.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on January 4, 2014 at 15:34

Thanks Thérèse  - it was good to meet you at the HoL social and thanks again for letting me speak a bit of French with you - vive la reine!

>>you must recognize

You seem to assert that there are standards of behaviour to be followed. If not, 'the decent citizen' will all know and agree. One way of reacting is right and another wrong. This is because there is a deal struck between the people and those who govern that, in exchange for our compliance, we get treated equally and fairly. Like Rousseau's social contract. 

I don't know you well enough to know if you've been influenced by growing up in a republic as opposed to a monarchy but there seems to me to be a cultural difference in your attitudes and mine that could explain why I disagree with you.

There is no 'natural' justice in the Council.  We have the law and that's that.  The law is pragmatically applied - like in the Marijuana in Colorado, you can break the law in plain sight and still not get prosecuted. Corporates that don't pay any tax are not breaking enough laws. Landlords that exploit tenants with high rents, overcrowding and appalling property neglect are not breaking enough laws. There simply isn't enough money to help prevent every abuse - the savage cuts mean that more abuse is increasingly likely. 

You wrote that people expect:

>> a basic type of fairness from any civil servant

Who defines that? Most civil servants are not allowed to speak about their work. Many are paid very little, obliged to implement distressing cuts and under threat of dismissal. Some, as you reference, are subject to what is almost a public hate campaign.  Many appear to be not at all valued. Should this be taken into account?

There is a 'court of public opinion' that examines cases and implements verdicts. I suggest that we have to be careful to not accidentally try to reinforce a local consensus when we are all so different. Politics is the way forward.

>>they state a fact, basically what happened when they complained

It's very hard to rely on that to bring about any change.  I know nothing about this case and am not referring to it but people are generally unreliable reporters, particularly on forums like this - why don't they go through their local councillors?  Did they complain to the right person? How many times did other cases get resolved - is this a one-off? Should millions be spent on complaints that could otherwise be spent on direct help to the homeless, at the cost of a system that ignores complaints?

Should more money be spent on policing planning? Planning is surely among the most contentious of any local issue and planning departments throughout history have been subject to every type of full-frontal attack on every aspect of their operations and motives.  In a very few cases, corruption has been proved but really, nobody in their right mind would work in planning so as to cheat the public.

>>If the same complaining neighbour had been openly consulted

This thread is about an apparent injustice that was righted. Everyone local to a planning event gets consulted - they just don't bother to even respond. If you don't even bother to fill out consultation responses, is your view still valid? The original poster then makes a general slur ('potentially wide open to fraud') about the Planning department.  I presume they know almost nothing about the planning process in any detail, the qualifications of the inspectors, the system of governance etc.

What is the risk that, if what is called for by one person on their own is actually implemented, it will be a backward step? How would it be if, every time someone had a moan on HoL and called for a change in the planning system, it was actually done?

Why do people feel that their individual opinion should be acted on, based on a tiny amount of experience compared with the enormous collective experience Planning has.

Why don't they take responsibility for the situation instead of peeing on it from a great height, demanding sweeping changes and hating on the group of underpaid people who are only doing their best in reflecting what collective generations of us say we want?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on January 4, 2014 at 13:22

Chris, I've lived in Tottenham for over thirty years and have been active in my local Labour Party most of that time.  At different times I've been secretary and chair of my local ward branch and for two years was secretary of Tottenham Constituency.  From 1998 until now I've been a councillor for the ward where I live.

Obviously things are very different where you live and you are immensely fortunate. Working within a culture of openness and transparency - instead of Haringey's foetid secrecy - would be a huge advantage, for example.

Which borough are you in? What party do your approachable and effective local councillors belong to?  What are the issues where you've been listened to and where your suggestions and interventions have been effective in making change?  How does this actually work in practice?  Obviously it's a place with many lessons to teach us. Should anyone in positions of power in Haringey have a disposition to learn.

Of course sweeping statements condemning whole departments are grossly unfair. Over the years I have met many Haringey Council staff who are/were hard working, knowledgeable professionals of great integrity.

I personally know some councillors and ex-councillors who have worked tirelessly for residents. Many are or were people with left-wing/progressive principles and vision; with backbone and a moral compass. Rare and unfashionable although these qualities are now.

(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on January 4, 2014 at 15:35

I don't want to cross swords with you Alan - I mainly know you from your posts here and you seem to be someone deeply and closely involved with local politics - a tremendously nice guy with a wide range of interests and wisdom, a talented photographer etc and someone who looks exemplary as a Councillor to me. 

I've only lived in Crouch End for half the time you've lived in Tottenham and have never sought nor held office, so have absolutely none of your long experience dealing with local people and their real issues. I help organise various events, get involved politically if I can see it as effective and do stuff around the borough. Over the years I've met many local councillors formally and informally and seen them in action. I closely follow all the 'hot' issues I can - wouldn't be possible without the tremendous, largely unsung work of the HoL admins and regular posters like you - thank you.

In some respects I think councillors are not only wrong but damaging to the place my kids are growing up in - in short, I think some decisions are ruining the place.

I've tried as much as I can spare the effort to get them to see the error of their ways. Having been comprehensively defeated (so far!) I accept that I do not have the power to bring about the world I want, but at least I try. Councillors like you are the only ones with the cohones to stand up and be counted but more importantly, you succeeded in getting elected and I can't even be bothered to consider taking on what I see as a thankless task - who'd be a Councillor?

This, and my general life experience, is the basis of my assessments.

Your sour view might very well be accurate or it may be jaundiced by your contrarian nature and experience - as a fellow contrarian, I salute you! Please, hide scathing criticism unless you can  right wrongs.

Casually throwing out non-sequiturs like 'foetid secrecy' (how do you know how secretive they are?) makes things worse - the last thing we need are general slurs against the council - the council is us. The point is to change things for the better.

It may be that the system is rotten to the core and most councillors are dreadful but we are where we are - you're not on the 'Brandwagon' calling for revolution, are you? I really don't see anything other than a group of people who, like any group of people, have a range of strengths and weaknesses but are fundamentally trying to do good.

Councillors seem like a fine bunch to me - I haven't met all 57 or so of them but quite a few over the years.  They're not in it for the money, that's for sure.  Nearly half are paid £10,500 per year for what is more than a full time job with anti-social hours. How many jobs are there where you're obliged to publish your mobile phone number and be on call 24/7 for a pittance? 

The candidates are drawn from such a cross-section of the voters that to imply that they are sub-standard is to insult the whole borough. Some seem to have come from senior positions in industry and some from ordinary lives with better prospects - they surely mainly care about others.

A few, on occasion, like elsewhere, are probably corrupt but abuse of power comes as no surprise.  They're politically biased but who in Haringey of whatever party doesn't want a better Haringey? Does it matter if your opponent has a different view on an issue low on the list as we get on with the priorities?

Assuming they're fair and reasonable, who disagrees with your priorities for Tottenham and for Haringey, Alan?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by markb on January 4, 2014 at 20:28

"the council is us".   It's decidedly not.  It's a bunch of people that we take a punt on from a dubious list. Some do, some don't.

"a better Haringey". There is no such thing. It entirely depends on your perspective and motivations. It's a multi-dimensional optimisation problem and there's no way to please everyone - people have different preferences and priorities. I'd pedestrianise Green Lanes from Wood Green down to Harringay Green lanes- that would make my Haringey better.  Some things are "motherhood & apple pie", most are not.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by matt on December 21, 2013 at 18:02

 On the planning theme generally take a  look at these really scary schemes proposed by developers in London in the 20th century. Boris btw is very busy encouraging mass new developments within London, skyscrapers galore, but with many apartments probably ending up as investments for the overseas moneyed individuals/corps. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by pamish on December 21, 2013 at 18:23

[edit] ....probably ending up empty as investments... /[edit]

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sparkle on January 26, 2014 at 16:25

chris, 

It feels extremely uncomfortable that you are suggesting posters on this thread are only entitled to criticise if they are well placed on the moral high ground by middle class access to information, resources and the time to make themselves well informed about the running of our local council. (to say nothing of culturally adapted to know that this is necessary and with sufficient language skills). 

(as an aside, I also find it extraordinary that you might be personally criticising Alan and implying he has no right to an opinion when he quite clearly does meet the criteria of being involved and informed) !  

You are indeed immensely fortunate to be resident on the Crouch End side of the borough, and - presumably since you mention children - having had them educated in schools there. Having spent some time sourcing funding for local schools on the *bad lands* side I can tell you that in looking at awarding of grants a few years ago some very interesting bias became apparent towards schools in crouch end with lots of active middle class parents over schools in eastern parts of the borough when it came to awarding optional additional funding. None of this was illegal in any way. The upshot is that the better resourced schools got more money. Engagement does not always bring about fair results in the overall scheme of things as it will always tend to be biased towards those who are already well resourced. (like yourself for example, as you clearly have time and resources to attend meetings, keep up to date with policy and create pie charts )

 There is a serious point about management of local services that is not just about our individual experiences. I sincerely believe one of the cures to this bias is well run professionally managed services who are transparent in their decision making, follow their own stated rules and let customers know what to expect when they make contact. 

In this way, the first time someone who has never been in contact with the council is moved to do so by something personally affecting them (which, lets face it is mostly everyone) - they will be rewarded with the feeling that their feedback matters, rather than disenchanted and put off any future contact. 

It actually does not matter so much if the planning department does not have the resources to deal promptly with all enquiries. What matters is that when contacted, they are able to prioritise the enquiry and provide an expectation of how long it might be before they can realistically deal with the query. If it's 10 days, its 10 days. Also, if they say the planning rules are xyz - then they quite clearly apply the rule xyz and can demonstrate this. If they make a mistake, they state this and take steps to put it right.

I can cope with that, and i'm sure most people could. You start from giving a realistic expectation and then work towards improving responses. 

Personally i think this is a much more realistic way of improving local council for all than the expectation of individual involvement. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on January 26, 2014 at 18:15

>>posters on this thread 

Agree that it would be good if the inarticulate and those who know and/or understand little of the topic for whatever reason express themselves here because truth isn't limited to the well-educated middle-class, but I honestly don't think that anything I write put any of them off. Almost nobody reads this stuff.

>>personally criticising Alan

Alan has had the guts to step forward and won the right to represent people by being elected - that alone wins my admiration. From what I can sense of his abilities from his posts here, he is in a good position to pinpoint how things can be significantly improved.  His years of service win him the right to a very long moan but I am asking him to be part of the solution.  It is not a criticism of him personally - I don't know him personally and mean no offence and I would apologise like mad if he took any of it personally.

>> lots of active middle class parents

Completely agree that the the middle-classes work the system to their advantage and that creates more inequality. Am pretty sure that everyone around here is acutely aware of this and the Council particularly take every step to try to right this imbalance. It is precisely what government is for in my opinion - without a government looking out for the disadvantaged, the rich would drive them to satanic mills.

Local lad (well, Walthamstow) William Morris, who wrote News From Nowhere

Amazingly, even after all this time, the ConDems still act first and foremost for the rich middle and upper classes and the left wing for the poor, and both sides fear their opponents enough to try to appease.  Political choice sort of comes down to either left wing or right wing but we as voters are way more nuanced than that, which is why politics appears to be failing us I think. Apparently, in Germany, the coalition is one of left, right and centre - what sort of politics is that?

>> I sincerely believe one of the cures

I really don't think it matters what any of us believe, only what change we can actually bring about. There is real  power in lots of individuals "voting with their feet", but mob rule is a two-edged sword.  Of course we all want world peace so why don't we have it? 

There is also a danger in leaving it to those who know the topic - the "technocrats".  So I was amazed to learn, for instance, that it was politically acceptable to not base policies on evidence. What? If the evidence was there you could derive a policy that ignored it and still be credible? Drugs policy seems to be like that. Remember David (Horse-riding is more dangerous than Ectasy) Nutt?  It seems that the Education minister (of any party in power) can dream up any hare-brained scheme they want - why is that?

The world seems to be changed by powerful ideas and politics is probably about gaining enough influence to implement ideas - the art of the possible (or "showbusiness for ugly people"). The politicians are there to represent, not to be experts. Even the things on which all the experts agree is sometimes not pursued for political reasons (qv Climate Change). Many people have crazy opinions but it seems to be OK to implement their crazy will. We can't think of a better way of doing it.

>>you start from giving a realistic expectation and then work towards improving responses. 

You write as if all we need do is decide that the planning dept should confirm to this and that standard and then go about making that happen. It cannot be that easy.  All of our institutions are the best that those working in them can make them and those are the people who have a better claim to be able to improve them than any individual (you or me, for instance).

Do you think that the people in planning cannot see what is wrong?  Do you think that the planners are not trying to do the best they can? When people like you or I take a cursory look at the situation and make pronouncements as to how it should be, how do you think they regard comments such as those posted here? If you look at the planning sub-committee you see the divide - on the one hand, apparently detached professionals making expertise-based recommendations, on the other, the politicians making opinion-based decisions. Why do you think it is not the other way round?

We don't have a leg to stand on - it doesn't matter what we think as individuals - it would only matter if we had some influence, and that influence can only be gained through the political process.  

So, if you do care, get involved and be the change you want to see.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sparkle on January 27, 2014 at 21:38

Well, yes and no. Wish i had more time to reply. 

Curious you seem to think i'm not 'being the change I want to be...' though. I'm sure i saw that episode of Oprah some time in my teens and nailed it, so am rather alarmed that allegedly i didn't.

sorry- i just had to. 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page