Harringay online

Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!

I wasn't going to say this as I'm loathe to criticise someone's choice of employer for their first job. I did however think it was a bit off that Adam Jogee was working as a researcher for Terrapin Communications. Why did I think this was off? Well, their list of clients included the three firms currently bidding to run a large part of the council'sour land in a 20 year "partnership" deal. I asked around and was told that he was a good boy and was being responsible about it. He's now the Majority Chief Whip.

So then I come across THIS POST on OpinioN8 which is Crouch End's version of HoL. There it states that

Councillor Kober has dined six times at Terrapin's expense, once in Cannes. Detail on the lunches decreases over time.

Councillor Strickland was also at this dinner in Cannes and has dined at Terrapin's expense another four times.

Councillor Jason Arthur - twice, recently, with Peter Bingle and again with another partner, Christian Klapp.

Go see the post on OpinioN8, click on the links. See for yourself. Adam was a just graduated student when he became a Labour councillor, now he's a researcher for perhaps the country's best known Tory lobbyist.

Martin Ball pointed some of this out to us about 18 months ago and we were all a bit meh. Presumably we consider it slightly off to worry about who pays for someone else's lunch. However, Terrapin's client list should give us cause for concern given what is also happening with Hornsey Town Hall. Have we been duped here?

Tags for Forum Posts: corruption, haringey, haringey development vehicle, hornsey town hall, opinion8, terrapin

Views: 6899

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

You still haven't realised.. 

When you were a councillor, what you said was relevant. It was always patronising, that's your way.. always frighten off the punters or any opposition by quoting this and that, that and this.

But now, I would imagine, your input is seen as no different to anyone else's. It's just that these days, the bitterness just seeps through.

I respected your council work, all the photos, initiatives. But I dislike backstabbing very much.

Last try Stephen.

When some former colleagues are planning to pursue a potentially disastrous course, the ethical thing to do is to warn them. That's what I'm doing and what several dozen people in the Tottenham Labour Party are doing.

Then add another dimension. Imagine that what is proposed is potentially going  to cause very serious harm not just to the small group of people involved, but several thousand more people locally. In my view the ethical case to stop this course of action becomes urgent and overwhelming. At least to tell other people - outsiders - about the risks in what is about to happen.

Now please think about this and if you don't understand what I'm saying, consider not reading what I post.

You and I have never met and we have no real idea about one another's life. I have no idea what you do or who you love or who loves you. Whether or not you are happy and fulfilled or not. Nor what makes you tick; Nor how often you laugh and cry. You may rightly say that none of that is any of my business. People share or don't share what they choose to.
But one difference between us that I don't pretend to know how you feel; and about your motivation for saying the things you write.


According to various Terrapin twitter accounts it is Adam Jogee's birthday today. Just saying.

It's Dave Clark's birthday today too.

A fine Son of Tottenham.

Is Cllr Jogee Glad All Over or in Bits and Pieces?

John, Pam, I think that people who want to stop this Development Vehicle need to pool their ideas and resources as a matter of urgency. The KoberTories are committed to a Kamikazi strategy.

I think that's (Kamakazi) the kind of thing that is winding people up. The council have some very understandable objectives with this "vehicle". They can either take the bull by the horns and redevelop/regenerate Tottenham according to their own desires, or they can watch it all drip away into the hands of private landlords via right-to-buy. Something has to be done and I don't see the possibility of a similar effort to the StArt project in St Ann's.

What's most objectionable is the PROCESS for this. The boozy lunches, the shmoozing with highly paid lobbyists, the conflicts of interest.

John McMullan.The objectives may be - sort of - understandable. But these objectives are based on some right-wing theories and assumptions. Theories of property developers and speculators and major landowners who stand to make a packet whichever way this goes. Because their "chips" in the game are parcels of public land. And their "bet" is underwritten by the public purse.
Councillors can try to understand these theories and assumptions and evaluate and critique them with the help of people with differing sorts of knowledge and expertise. For example they could have come to listen to a talk and discuss issues with Professor Loretta Lees who met Labour Party members at the Beehive Pub.
Or they can shut their eyes and follow their leader in an experiment with people's homes and lives, offered by their "partners" among the "developer community". (Those words by the way, are not my parody. That's is how Claire Kober and her pals speak.)

Of course the theory and assumptions may be right or partly right. Columbus experimented with a theory and did discover a route to the Indies. Although it wasn't the Indians he expected to meet. His small-scale experiment worked. Sort of. 

What has happened here? Cllr Claire Kober and her lunch club intend a huge scale experiment. They want to bet the farm on the theory they've been told is  going to work by property developers etc. Endorsed by our ex-Barnet Chief Executive and - oh, yes, assorted lawyers and consultants. (One consultant is being paid £870 per day. I'll send you his name and you can look him up online.)

Maybe I'm wrong, but so far I'm unaware of any councillors or developers (or consultants) whose own homes are being put into the areas "red-lined" by the Kober Council as up for disposal; to be packed into the "development vehicle" and driven off.
As Leona Helmsley might have said had she lived in Haringey: “We don't have our homes demolished and the land handed over to developers. "Only the little people" have that happen to them."

SWOT Analysis? Well not quite. There appears to be a SO-SO analysis. The plan has enormous Strengths and boundless Opportunities. Repeat. That's it.

Now let's see what's happened. A small group of Scrutiny councillors have tried to find out what happened in some other local councils who experimented with one of these "vehicles" on a smaller scale.
Now make a guess. Do you think that every single one of them said:
"Guys, do it! Do it now! Do it quick! Before the money runs out. It's a-m-aa-zing! Look, get on the train to Mithering-on-sea (Change at Muddlehead) we'll show  you what we've achieved. Well buy you lunch. We'll buy you brunch. Than take you to see our happy smiling tenants in their a-m-aa-zing new homes."

Or that perhaps just one of two of them said: "It's a sound scheme. Try it out with a small pilot carefully and cautiously. Tie up the legalities. And be sure to have a Plan B  in case you have to cancel it without needing to pay an overlarge compensation bill to the developers."
Actually no.

Got any opinions on the Development Vehicle Mr Hole?  Creative suggestions? Feedback on others' experiences?

Other councils have tried this (Croyden for example) and all have failed and been massively out of pocket.

Croydon ended up millions out of pocket, Pam. Anything down the back of your sofa in case even worse happens in Haringey?

It is a truth universally acknowledged that a Council Leader in possession of a costly, inept, high-risk, socially damaging, Haringey Development Vehicle must be in want of a new logo.



© 2024   Created by Hugh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service