The Supreme Court: Council loses case on Council Tax consultation

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Lynne on October 31, 2014 at 8:15

Thanks Alan, totally agree. Most consultations that affect people's lives are empty rhetoric, and predecided, most people are switched off as a result. Looking at the Supreme Court's definition of 4 principles of what constitutes a fair consultation (para 25 I think), sadly Haringey flout in most consultations 3 out of 4.

Consult in formative stages
Give relevant details (and now other options para 19) so consultees can make an informed response
In enough time
Take into account responses

Haringey as other LAs should comply now and look at other consultations in progress, unless they want to lose more public money fighting spurious cases. In truth the council would be better placed if they did, as certainly what are they expecting would happen, the 12 plagues as you say wrought upon it, and may run the risk of getting it right and supportive residents!

Interesting to see the poster placard is being signed off with a sketch of a clock tower (which?) and the South east wing of Ally Pally, ironically the bit of the HLF development they have given the least attention to, housing the historic 1936 BBC Studios come Westfield Park come future tearoom/function room with a view.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on October 31, 2014 at 11:57

The "iconic" image they used to represent Tottenham at Coombes Croft library was an artist's impression of the as-yet-unbuilt new Spurs stadium.

I have no idea why they didn't use a sketch of a real building. The Sagrada Familia, for example. Or the famous shot of Machu Picchu perched on a ridge high above the Sacred Valley. Or something local and current - a few bomb craters and a burned out half-track from the Tottenham War Zone?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on November 3, 2014 at 16:11

TODAY's Guardian carries a letter from Rev. Paul Nicholson, who figured in the case and who was complimented by one of the Supreme Court judges (link here or scan, attached).

Attachments:

• Today's Guardian letter of Rev Paul Nicholson.pdf, 429 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on November 3, 2014 at 20:27

I wish I could see the slightest sliver of evidence that Haringey' "leadership" had learned anything from its series of reverses in the Courts.  Okay, this wasn't the deeply shaming criticism of the AB & CD case. Nor the anger of the judge in the Musa case. Nor - as Clive Carter will remind us if I don't - the failure in the Firoka case with Alexandra Palace.

Maybe there were smug faces when the Council won the initial court judgement against Julie Davies. If so, it's premature. And nobody among Haringey's "leaders" will come out of that victimisation case with any credit.

I've been thinking hard about what is so wrong and so dysfunctional that our "leaders" refuse to learn that there's more than one side to each important question.  In the latest case, refusing to see that the arguments put forward by the Reverend Paul Nicholson were reasonable and had substantial merit.

Instead, we get a small group of people deciding on the outcome they want. Then, working backwards, putting in place processes to ensure they get there, come what may. Never mind what residents think about their proposals. Or how many objections or alternative views are presented. Or how far these alternative views may have a factual, logical and ethical basis. 

Worse, we routinely see manipulation of the consultation process. Including spinning of information. Or worse still, faux-consultations consisting of little more than mood music and fluffy words. If  Haringey Council was a bank, it would be open to criticism for mis-selling.

I recently came across an idea of J.K. Galbraith which he called "The convenience of reverse logic" — when you start with the preferred remedy and then move to a diagnosis. 

"Increasingly in recent times we have come first to identify the remedy that is most agreeable, most convenient, most in accord with major pecuniary or political interest, the one that reflects our available faculty for action; then we move from the remedy so available or desired, back to a cause to which that remedy is relevant."

Makes sense of the Kober Council's actions, doesn't it?  Whether it's letting out parks; or demolishing and selling-off chunks of public housing; giving away schools to private chains; or attacking trades unions and lowering staff terms and conditions; privatising or outsourcing services. They start with the right-wing Tory policies they want to see. Then they construct the rationale.

• ▶ Reply

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