Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
‘CHIEF Executive Andy Donald announces retirement from Haringey Council’
Picture credit: LBH webcast and HCP
At the council meeting in September pictured above, the CEO (Andy Donald) appeared relaxed; the Leader (Mark Blake), not so much.
Today, Haringey Council announced the retirement of CEO Donald.
During the time of the previous Administration, certain written representations were made to the Government Regulator of Social Housing. It is unclear whether the investigation into these matters has been completed …
———
P.S. Above, I've added a link to the representations published by the council and in the public domain for a fortnight.
Key documents including relevant correspondence with the Regulator between 2023-2025 and links to official reports relating to our housing services.
Among the "key documents" is the letter dated 18 November 2025 from Donald to the Regulator, full of assurances.
Is the investigation into political accountability continuing ?
Was the previous Cabinet Member with responsibility for Housing aware of that letter?
Should the Housing Cabinet Member have known of it?
Or, was the Deputy Council Leader asleep at the wheel?
For those who may have missed it the first time, the new Green Leader's video is here
.
.
Tags for Forum Posts: CEO, Haringey Council, early retirement
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton
-
C'mon Clive, it's a bit vague, innit. The phrase:
... "certain written representations". Does that mean anything ?Do you or anyone on the Council actually know something firm, frank, and factual about what's been going on?
-
-
No reply yet from Clive Carter. Which is disappointing.
I assume Clive knows that a quick Google search would show statements have been put out by Haringey. Adding to which, that Clive himself is excellent in drafting revealing Freedom of Information requests. And also how to focus on records concerning key areas such as fire safety or crucial repairs not actioned.
Meanhile Council Leader Mark Blake has been a Haringey Councillor for many years as well as a Labour cabinet member for some years.
I am not writing this to make party political points. But to illustrate that every elected councillor shares responsibility with all their fellow councillors to follow up on individual tenant's complaints. Raising them as necessary with housing staff. Also attending routine Council Estate visits with local housing managers.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter
-
ALAN, I'm afraid I'm not able to respond immediately to your posts.
certain written representations
… certainly does mean something!
Please see my P.S. above to yesterday's post, which may reduce the extent of your disappointment, if not the carping.
For anyone—including Rotten Boroughs—who has been following the council's latest scandal, no Google search is required.
I produced the FIRESTORM post on 28 October. That was at 11:50 AM, within 70 minutes of my first learning of the shocking Government Regulator's Report.
As of today, there's been nearly 1,000 views of the post I started, testament to importance of the subject and the value of Harringayonline.
Those who paid any attention to that post will be aware that I provided a wealth of data and links on this very channel, Harringayonline.
When on October 29 you responded to Cllr Kuper's parallel post seeking "further information", did you trouble to follow up her link to "all the available information"?
Better and clearer information may surface if and when the results of the council's promised investigation are released.
Clear information
For my part, I was disappointed in your quick and easy praise for the previous Member with Cabinet-level responsibility for Housing.
"clear information"
Really?
Sarah Williams—also the former Deputy Leader—wrote on Musk's channel "the Green Party have no grip on housing services."
In my view, this was at best an empty party political point rather than clear information. At worst, Cllr Williams' post—and here I have to agree with Jamie Harper's description—"That's some brass neck …".
.
-
Permalink Reply by Nigel
-
Dear Readers,
Let's put aside the bickering. Full marks to Clive for following up and publicising this.
The real points are not only that the Housing Regulator's report set out numerous and serious failings by the Council in its public housing duties, including as to repairs and fire safety but also that it finds that the Council's communications with the Regulator, which include CEO Mr Donald's careful and detailed report of November 2025, were misleading.
Specifically, those responses did not disclose relevant and serious failings known to the Council and which it was under a duty to report.
Mr Donald's resignation is clearly appropriate. It raises further questions for Mark Blake and the other elected Councillors (and their legal advisers) if Haringey Council is to be properly governed. Among them should be:
1. Given these findings, should Mr Donald be permitted to "take early retirement" without any inquiry or other consequences?
2. Has a full account been taken from him as to how and how many times and why the Council attempted to "snow" the Regulator?
3. Are we paying him out handsomely despite this breach of duty, which the Regulator regards as "serious"?
4. Which senior officers, the Director of Housing in particular, knew of the matters not reported but drafted and signed off on that communications before it got to the CEO? What if any action is being taken against them? Whose job is it to right these wrongs?
Aside from the admin responsibility of Mr Donald and other Council officers, the political responsibility seems to me to be one of failed oversight. Whatever else they may have done re housing during their term, it would not be a bad thing for those councillors who then held the Housing brief at least to tell us what they were told by the officers and what they knew. And show us the memos.
-
-
In her Annual Report for 2025/26, Bernadette Conroy, the Chair of the Regulator of Social Housing wrote this [emphasis added]:
"......Most landlords take their responsibilities seriously. They are investing record
amounts into fixing issues like damp and mould. They are also making tenants’
homes more energy efficient and remediating fire safety risks. And they are working
to improve their services to tenants, by listening to tenants and responding promptly
to address problems.
But some landlords have failed to do this. We now have a stronger remit to find
issues and get them to put things right at an earlier stage. Our first priority is for
landlords to self-refer when things go wrong – that way they can be fixed more
quickly. But we are also using our inspections and investigations to hold landlords to
account and intervene when needed.
We have a range of tools to get landlords to turn around poor performance. We are
already seeing the benefits of this improvement work, with some landlords achieving
higher regulatory grades through the year.
But even landlords with the highest grades need to improve. There is no room for
complacency. Again, good governance is crucial. Senior councillors and boards
need to have a clear understanding of the risks facing their organisation. This needs
to be underpinned by robust data that is used strategically to find problems at an
early stage and address their root causes. Although our governance requirements do
not apply to councils, they should still use these lessons to improve outcomes for
tenants."
-
-
NIGEL, you've listed some excellent questions about governance, that the promised investigation may yet answer.
… if Haringey Council is to be properly governed.
Er, yes. Due to years of complacency and much effective power and control sliding to "officers", I'm not sure this Borough—one of the UK's most rotten—can be governed properly.
It may be largely ungovernable.
A cleaning of these Augean Stables may be possible only with external intervention, comparable with the formation of our Borough in 1965.
Even the Local Government Ombudsman was unable to prise information from a previous stonewalling Administration: documents that might have shed light on the still covered-up Cranwood scandal, which may have involved criminality.
We are fortunate that there remain at least some Government Regulators, independent and objective. Without the Social Housing Regulator, residents would have been none the wiser about this council's latest scandal. And the council Leader deserves credit for his robust response.
And, the government needs to bring back the Audit Commission.
This latest scandal lives in a political context, as is clear from Mark Blake's video and Sarah Williams post on "X". The Greens have achieved one significant early retirement, but there are more early retirements that are sorely needed and overdue.
Most council employees are paid relatively modest and reasonable wages and salaries, but there is a small group where Labour appears to have long lost control over salary inflation. One former Labour Councillor told me this was down to National Pay Scales. However, is not the truth that the culture of the six-figure club has become a royal racket? And a racket increasingly unaffordable by the public?
If our practically-bankrupt council is to pay the outgoing CEO a glistening Golden Goodbye, then it will in effect come out of borrowed funds and we may never know the details.
The article researched by the HCP quotes the salary of the CEO as £235,584.
The pay levels in the bloated six-figure club may tend to insulate "officers" from the needs and concerns of average residents and more so for council tenants. Could such insulation have been a factor in the council's misleading the Government Regulator about high-risk cladding and fire prevention?
Perhaps because there are too many mere Directors to deal with, another layer of bureaucracy was created, earlier this year (?) and presumably by the CEO. The five Corporate Directors represents a new layer, collectively paid approximately one million pounds p.a. There are also about 80 (eighty) "Heads". Some heads need either to be combined, or to roll: there are too many Chief and not enough Indians.
Over the years our council is likely to have paid out many millions of taxpayers' money in the form of what I understand lawyers call Compromise Agreements. Cetails of this largesse are shrouded in secrecy. Some are rumoured to have been generous to a (huge) fault.
For half a century, several in local Labour Cabinets regarded our council as a stepping stone to the place where they were convinced their prodigious talent truly entitled them to be: in Parliament. Thus, this temporary stage meant that too much attention was future career-focused and elsewhere while local long-term control was ceded to "permanent" council staff.
The "Rebel" Haringey London Borough of Culture 2027 partly reflects this culture of distraction, rather than focus on the basics. Not least, in producing auditable accounts. My impression is that some Labour Cabbies simply gave up on fixing the council and on improving the lives of residents, including their tenants.
The Opposition LibDems called for an Extraordinary meeting of Full Council and that is scheduled to be held on Monday 23rd November.
Residents who pay for all this, may learn more then.
.
© 2026 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
