Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Neighbourhood Forum
Out of interest, has anyone got the ball rolling to create a Harringay Neighbourhood Forum in line with the Localism Act? Or perhaps an existing organisation is putting itself forward for the role (as the Highgate Society are doing)? There are a couple of such initiatives west of the tracks, and I'm curious who else is doing so locally.
Ben
Tags for Forum Posts: neighbourhood forum, neighbourhood planning
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Arkady on
-
Hey, I didn’t say that the wider Lib Dem record on council housing was better – there has been a systemic problem, as you note. I say only that the Lib Dem proposals in Haringey were good, and not cynical. Contact Cllrs Strang or Wilson if you want details.
As for your apparent cynicism about Lib Dem campaigning. Look, as I’ve noted before on this forum, I’m am now an activist for that party. I don’t start that way, I started as a neutral community campaigner. I only started working with Haringey Lib Dems when I saw a) how bloody hard they worked (campaigning all year round, and not just at election time) b) how they were successfully able to get things done with their campaigning and lobbying and c) how they successfully exposed the very real failures of the Council, again and again.
You criticise the Lib Dems for ‘council bashing’. I think this is mistaken for two reasons. First, that is the role and responsibility of an opposition to criticise errors and suggest solutions - that’s how representative democracy works. 2) a few years ago the independent audit commission fingered Haringey as the worst council in London. Haringey has some of the highest council taxes in London, yet one of the highest levels of complaints. Given that this is the outcome of 43 years of Labour rule in Haringey, why would anyone reward them with their vote? Incidentally I think that any polity would be in this state after decades of single-party rule (including Lib Dem rule). Pluralism and political competition make for good government. It’s time for a shake-up, and only the Lib Dems are in the position to do that in Haringey.
-
Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on
-
I think the voters vote Labour because the people who vote are excellent people who have the best interests of the borough at heart. The only problem is that not enough of them can be bothered to even fill in a postal vote, otherwise there would be even more Labour Cllrs.
You would do us all a favour if you could provide details of what exactly the Lib Dems stand for, maybe on a separate thread.
We cannot accept promises from any party any more really, but what we could do fairly is to look at the most important political decisions that have already been made in Haringey and say how the Lib Dems would have done it differently.
What do the Lib Dems see as the important issues and how would they go about addressing them?
That would surely serve to answer probably the single most important question - what would life be like for us in a Lib Dem controlled Council?
If you could limit it to Harringay, that would be good.
-
-
The manifesto for the May elections will be out soon, which will no doubt be a splendid starting point.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Chris, as long as you refuse to face up to Haringey Labour's serious faults and its steady drift to the Right, you simply perpetuate the two party Punch-and-Judy nonsense we're suffering from. Blame-all Praise-all; Benjamin Franklin's two blockheads.
I write this as a Labour Party member for over forty years, a former Constituency Secretary, branch secretary; and a councillor for nearly sixteen years.
As you know the majority of people don't vote in our local council elections. This time there's no General Election on the same date to swell the votes.
Now, you may be right that some people this is because they "can't be bothered to even fill in a postal vote". But for others I've spoken to, they are very bothered indeed. And their feelings range along a continuum from hostile indifference to outright contempt.
Some would like to vote Labour and usually do, but have been dissuaded by the St Ann's vote-rigging and the party's cover-up of it.
Others who are happy to vote for David Lammy and Catherine West will not be voting for Claire Kober and her supporters especially with the prospect of her as Leader for a further four years of drift and damage.
Arkady, as for your suggestion that the Party Manfestos will enable voters to know what they have achieved, stand for, and promise, I assume you were 'avin' a laff.
-
-
Without wishing to teach my grandmother to suck eggs, it is about the will of the majority Alan.
I do face the fact that Haringey has serious faults, but what is to be done about them? How good a council can we expect when the majority cannot be bothered to vote? You say there are people who are very bothered indeed, but how come Labour has been returned time and time again? How much proof is needed that people here are Labour people?
It might be the lesser of two evils, it might be we should have gone with the alternative vote - who knows? All we know is that, under the system we have, Labour have earned the right to govern as well as they can. If they really screw up central govt will step in.
I wish it were different, better even, but I imagine that it will be much, much worse under the Lib Dems.
Basically, which party would you prefer to have power?
-
-
Chris, the majority of electors don't vote in local elections. And I don't know their "will". You claim "the people who vote are excellent people who have the best interests of the borough at heart." So do the "excellent" minority of a minority who vote Labour express the people's Will?
Actually many non-voters are also "excellent people". And may well have the interests of the borough - or at least of their street or neighbourhood at heart. Some of them probably realise that their own local councillors are hopeless. Or maybe they think these kindly councillors are good hearted and well-intentioned people who - as Arkady suggests - have very limited power or influence. (Worse still if they are LibDem councillors since they have almost no power at all.)
Labour has earned the right to govern Haringey? Surely you mean we have learned to manipulate the system? You know how selection of candidates works. For the LibDems maybe a couple of hundred people meet to select candidates from their own - probably - dwindling numbers. For Labour a couple of dozen - or fewer - people meet every four years and listen to five minute speeches and then question people for a few minutes. A selectorate which - in effect - decides who gets the seats in a "safe" ward.
Under the Leader/Cabinet System, if those selected keep their noses clean and stick their hands up when the Dear Leader wants, they can go on pretty much indefinitely. (In one case until dying in an old people's home.)
In Haringey the system is diseased and I want to see it changed. And until it is changed the majority of local electors will not bother casting their votes. You suggest voting for the lesser of two evils. Which sounds sensible until you realise that in Haringey the Leader/cabinet system means that the practical choice is between two Tory evils. To quote Leo Tolstoy on a different issue: "There is as much difference as between cat shit and dog shit. But I don't like the smell of either one or the other."
By the way I've always been a right-winger in the Labour Party. But all the parties have streamed past me further to the right. (It's like the scene in Buster Keaton's The General when he's chopping wood for the train boiler while Confederate and Union Armies stream past in the background). (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncapCvkPgVw - at 29 minutes)
In my view until the system is reformed, electors should insist on talking with individual candidates and only vote for those after making their own judgement. If they can't find anyone to vote for they can walk to the polling station and write across the ballot paper: "I don't like the smell of any of them" and sign it Leo Tolstoy.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
-
-
Arkady: "A fully costed proposal for building the first wave of such housing."
Really? I am curious yellow/orange. I recall a LibDem aspiration but I don't remember seeing it as an fcp. Have you a link to the scheme? Or a copy?
What I voted for was a more modest but what seemed achievable housebuilding aspiration from Cllr Joe Goldberg. But as we've learned, he's noted for aspirational blathering. Let's hope it was the real thing this time. My camera and Flickr pages are keen to record the homes that Joe built.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
-
-
Talk to Cllr Strang - but presumably you were at the meeting when the alternative budget was voted down?
-
-
Arkady, I'm not saying there wasn't a "fully costed proposal". Just that, while I recall a LibDem motion, I don't remember seeing a paper which set it out in hard figures - hopefully with costs checked by the accountants. (A facility which the opposition party can request,)
Presumably you did see it, as you're confidently referring to it now. But if you haven't kept a copy then can I please suggest that, rather than something privately passing between me and Cllr Paul Strang, you might ask the LibDems to post a copy on HoL in this thread.
Just the facts & figures would do. Then we can all have a good look.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillors)
-
-
Sure:
Last year's plans are summarised here:
The actual amendments are here:The amendments were signed off by the Council's Chief Financial Officer, and if voted through the budget would have remained balanced.I'm told that every Labour councillor voted against the amendment. Did you still have the whip then, Alan?
-
-
So we would have had 100 more council houses and 30 minutes free parking in town centres and a number of other minor changes/cuts to pay for them?
I really don't see that this amounts to much - would people realise that any of it was "core" Lib Demming? It just looks like a slightly different emphasis than Labour would make, that is all. Not party political - what do Lib Dems actually stand for?
What are the main problems that need to be addressed where voters live? 100 more houses and 30 mins free parking don't even begin to address them, so where are the important measures that would justify the risk of getting rid of Labour?
It has to be shown clearly that it would be better under the Lib Dems or what is the point of even considering voting for them, given that they've had 43 years to come up with something and have never been in power here? Being nice guys who work hard in opposition is not enough, sadly. They need to be able to deliver solutions.
-
-
I think it’s possible – just possible – that you are overestimating the scope of powers available to local government, and underestimated the limitations placed on it by national and city governance. Your earlier reference to Chomsky in this discussion stokes these fears. Local government in London has some limited influence over education, housing, transport, libraries, the waste disposal, etc. It isn’t in a position to overthrow the socioeconomic regime.
I’m tempted to ask you what you think the ‘main problems’ are, and also for you to suggest one policy within the prevue of local government that might remedy one of those problems, just to check whether we’re coming at this issue from a similar place.
As for the broader package of proposed Lib Dem solutions, again you had best wait – with baited breath no doubt – for the forthcoming manifesto.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
