onionbagblog

Hey hoe - back to #hyper #hyper #hyperlocal matters around my micro patch of South London. Back to Kelly’s boozer.

An application has been made [PDF] requesting that our friends from @lambeth_council allow a slight change to the current entertainment licence.

Nothing to really concern local residents over - only an alcohol and live music licence from 10am through until 1am Monday to Wednesday, and then a slight extension from 10am to 5am on Thursdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays.

Deep, deep *sigh*

It is actually rather decent that the landlord has formally gone through the official channels. We have had some trouble here locally of late with an impromptu car wash that appeared at the start of the summer.

The garage at Kelly’s became a makeshift business overnight, with no formal planning application, or consultation with local residents over the change of business use.

Thankfully the very decent @janeinlondon / E Hants was quick on the case, and the car wash has closed down (although the horrid hand made sign, and the Portuguese flag, both still remain in place in what is a Conservation Area.)

The pub itself has been empty, of sorts, for over two years now; officially waiting to be re-developed, unofficially a squat. The current occupiers aren’t really a nuisance, and I would rather have the squat kids tucked up in bed keeping themselves to themselves than a 5am council endorsed entertainment licence.

The current licence extension is all rather confusing. A planning application was made at the start of the summer to convert Kelly’s into luxury flats. Part of the plan was to re-open the bar downstairs.

It is unclear if this highly unsocial 5am application is part of the existing planning application. You would have to think probably not - who the hell would want to buy a luxury flat, knowing that the bar down below has a licence until five in the morning?

Which makes me think that the current owners are trying to squeeze the last drops of income out of the premises with a licence extension until the new building work starts.

I’ve formally objected, and have asked for the thoughts of @janeinlondon, Jack the Lad Hopkins and the lone LibDem, Councillor Brown.

The application comes from a Company Secretary with a Camberwell SE5 8SX address. Coming across the Southwark border with a request for a bonkers 5am entertainment licence in a residential area, is something that hopefully our friends from @lambeth_council will be frowning upon.

Won’t they?

To the Mayor and Councillors of the London Borough of Lambeth:

YOU ARE SUMMONED TO ATTEND A MEETING of the COUNCIL to be held in the Council Chamber, Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton Hill, SW2 1RW on Wednesday, 28 July 2010 at 7.00 pm.

Cripes.

This was the message on the agenda front sheet from Lambeth Chief Executive Derrick Anderson to his fine democratically elected and (just about) accountable local politicians.

Strange then that the self-styled “third hardest working Councillor” was absent, as was @ClaphamCommoner, the newly elected ward councillor for, um, Tulse Hill.

[Happy to correct on the record any reasons for non-attendance / delays on the 88 Clap'ham omnibus etc.]

But anyway - about that second Full Council meeting of the new @LambethLabour
led @lambeth_council - warning: the word “cuts” is likely to feature heavily, but not half as heavily as “blame.”

Blimey.

Petitions were presented first to the new Mr Mayor, proudly sporting a rather civic dandy goatee beard. In particular, a petition against a new Tesco (the rotters!) in West Norwood received the highest number of signatures.

A total of 800 is impressive, although it would take a further 2,200 names to trigger any council debate under this new Power to the People era of local democracy.

Deputations were then heard from invited citizens residents. A powerful speech followed from a concerned local about the possible closure of a Children’s Centre in Kennington. The guest spoke of how:

“The #lambethcoop White Paper speaks of co-operation between council and citizens. This is clearly not forthcoming in Kennington

In response, @cllr-robbins, the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People set out the response from the Labour party:

“We hope the Conservative Government continue to fund the centre. Moving the centre away from Kennington may be part of the process.”

Definitely one to scrutinise over the coming weeks and months. Speaking of which - it’s only the Annual Report of the Scrutiny Committee up next.

Cripes.

Scrutinising the scrutinisers is a strenuous process. @LambethLibDems Councillor Clyne certainly made is sound as such:

“Scrutiny doesn’t work in Lambeth. Ever since the ALMO was introduced, Lambeth Labour has said that 30% of council property is not up to the legal standard. A recent report quoted 40%, a figure that has been denied by Labour. Now we find that the figure is nearer 49%. Meanwhile, tenants have been hit with a rent rise.”

All of this navel gazing led to further, um, scrutiny, as Mr Mayor moved on to Councillor Questions. In the absence of the holidaying @LambethLibDems Leader, Councillor Lumsden (wish you were here!) Tory Leader Councillor Whelan took up the cause celebre of the Love Me I’m a Liberal Lot: Lambeth Life.

Oh Lordy.

Once again, the disappointingly unworkable trilogy of @LambethLabour, the opposition parties and *shhh* @SthLondonPress - the three organisations that between them *should* be able to improve, promote and celebrate the borough - proved to be completely incompatible. Driving a wedge through all three, and subsequently through the heart of Lambeth politics is of course Lambeth Life.

Councillor Whelan asked @cllrstevereed:

“What cost saving plans do you have for Lambeth Life? What plans are in place to make it clearer that the publication is published by the Labour led Lambeth Council? And are you aware of the impact that Lambeth Life has on other local media?”

@cllrstevereed is of course all too aware of the impact that Lambeth Life has on *other* local media - that’s all part of the plan, stooopid.

As for more accountability and transparency, @cllrstevereed’s current flavour of the month, the @LambethLabour Leader replied:

“Our aim is for Lambeth Life to make a net profit. This will then be used to help reduce Council Tax.”

It’s a viscous circle spinning out of control here. Read about how good your local authority is in the local authority self-published propaganda sheet, the paper then makes a profit, Council Tax is reduced and… read about how good your local authority is in…

Strangely absent from the response was the call to incorporate Lambeth Life into the one size fits all fix of #lambethcoop. The former is about making money, the latter is about cutting. Never the twain shall meet.

Gamekeeper then became poacher, as @cllrstevereed turned the tables on the @LambethLibDems and put forward his question to the Leader of the opposition. It was a wasted moment, with the holidaying Councillor Lumsden clearly (and not for the first, or last time) the target of the @LambethLabour Leader.

It was left to Councillor Braithwaite to brush away the tit for tat question of:

“Do you agree that a 20% increase on VAT will hit the poor the hardest?”

“This question comes straight from the pages of Lambeth Life The Daily Mail,” replied the @LambethLibDems Deputy, in an almost disappointed manner. Keeping up the theme of local irrelevance, Councillor Braithwaite added:

“The health inequality gap is greater now than it has been at any stage in the post-war years. The old Labour government is to blame for this”

Ask a silly question, etc.

A Nu Labour plant then completed Councillor Questions. @labourstockwell‘s Councillor Bigham asked @QueenFlo, the Cabinet Member for Culture, Sport and the 2012 Games, what legacy will be left in Lambeth after 2012.

Councillor Bigham also spoke about “my great friend Kate Hoey.” Cripes. If Nu Labour great friends behave by trying to unsettle the sitting MP and campaigning to replace her agent, then you can see why the Nu Labour project is still greeted with some cynicism within Lambeth.

@QueenFlo ticked all the right 2012 boxes, although strangely the sport (and legacy) of swimming didn’t feature in her reply.

The Cabinet Report from the meeting on Monday night followed. I say Cabinet Report, but really it was a debate focussing entirely on the Emergency Budget that has been bludgeoned through. This is a crucial matter, but equally important is Streatham Hub, another heavyweight agenda item on Monday night. Not a word was uttered all evening about the relocation of Streatham Ice Rink down the A23 to Brixton.

Councillor McGlone, the Cabinet Member for Finance, opened for @LambethLabour, stating:

“The ConDem government has delivered a war on local government services. Thanks to my colleague Councillor Dickson, we are now on a sound footing in Lambeth. The future however is out of control.”

With a bit of finger pointing across the party benches, Councillor McGlone added:

“You have no political mandate in Lambeth to attack public services.”

Which is just as well, seeing as though it is a Labour council ( a LABOUR council!) that is proposing four hundred public sector redundancies, and not a ConDem local authority.

Speaking for the opposition, @LambethLibDems’ Councillor Dodsworth delivered a macro economic speech, which although was well founded, it did little to address the cuts that are coming locally to Lambeth:

“There is not point blaming the government that has been in power for only eight weeks, when your party was in power at Westminster for thirteen years.”

Leave it to the lovely Lambeth Tories (seriously) to keep it #hyperlocal. Councillor Memery reminded the Nu Labour sheep that her party called for a 5% drop in Councillor allowances only last month, a move that was blocked by the @LambethLabour whip. Councillor Memery also spoke of the £5.8m debt in uncollected Council Tax.

With a nod towards *shhh* co-operation, Councillor Memery concluded by asking @cllrstevereed if he is willing to work with a neighbouring borough that has a proven track record in efficiency, and not a partner that is purely aligned because of political affiliation.

I wonder whom exactly Councillor Memery has in mind?

Moving on…

The slumbering big political beast that is @AnnaJCowen was soon awoken by the booming voice of Councillor Bradley, the @LambethLibDems’ lone voice in the Vassall ward. The straight talking local politician may like the sound of his own voice, but it is not to the liking of the Nu Labour sheep. Which is perhaps good reason to increase the decibels further still.

“I have been hearing fairytales in the chamber tonight. Here are three facts: (i) the national crisis is the fault of the old Labour government. (ii) Cuts didn’t start with the coalition government. They first appeared in Lambeth in 2006 with the local housing officers, in tandem with a 17% rent hike, and (iii) your pain is self-inflicted. The £10m overspend, the temporary housing scandal and the situation of only one swimming pool that is open in the borough.”

Blimey.

Following the reverberations echoing around the chamber after Councillor Bradley’s roar of a rallying call, a nervous hush fell over the Nu Labour benches as Mr Mayor called upon Labour Independent Councillor Abrams to speak.

Oh Lordy.

Having been suspended from @LambethLabour for no apparent public reason, behind the scenes and the Nu Labour whip has been doing his best to whip the popular local figure back into voting with the right wing of the party. A reply of “bugger off” would be considered polite, given the underhand circumstances.

Councillor Abrams chose instead to vent his disgust at his Vassall ward fellow representative, @LambethLibDem’s Councillor Bradley:

“With £85m of cuts, the ConDems have gone out of their way to attack the working class. It is a disgrace that Councillor Bradley supports a party that is withholding all money from Charles Edward Brooke School in our shared Vassall ward.”

It was a fighting speech from Councillor Abrams, and perfectly balanced to show his continued support of the Labour party, as well as his dignified stance in keeping to his left of centre principles. It even led to an endorsement from @cllrstevereed, and it may have just given Councillor Abrams a return ticket back into the Labour fold.

Back on the ropes after the heavyweight Councillor Abrams floored them, and @LambethLibDems reverted back to form, heckling inexperienced local politicians, rather than old brusiers like Red Jimbo Dickson. @LambethLabour’s Councillor Smith was lined up as the punch bag, with his maiden speech being the target to be shouted down and ridiculed from across the floor.

Defiantly he carried on, and it is to the credit of Councillor Smith that not only did he silence the LibDems, but also that the substance was relevant to his Knight’s Hill ward, Lambeth as a borough as well as the overall national picture.

More of the same, please.

But it’s a funny business this Nu politics. One minute you are selling out your principles and doing a deal with the Tory bogeyman, and then the next you’re bending over backwards and allowing Nu Labour to shaft you from behind.

A joint motion submitted by @LambethLabour and @LambethLibDems (Lordy) then followed, attacking the severe cutting in Lambeth of the BSF cash by the national coalition government. Politicians that were finger pointing only minutes earlier, were now lining up to arse lick one another.

All except the Lambeth Tories though. Bed hopping is not a Conservative pastime in the borough. Councillor Whelan complained of how his group was not invited to support the motion. The implication was that someone has to be to blame (someone always has to be to blame in the Rotten Borough) and the Tory bogeyman was the easy target.

But be careful where you are putting your tongue in this austere new age of Nu politics. It didn’t take long for @LambethLibDems to declare that the taste wasn’t to their liking, with Councillor Best stating:

“It is a shame that Labour didn’t act sooner in Lambeth over BSF. The funding withdrawal wouldn’t have applied if action had been taken earlier.”

Now go and wash your hands, dear.

Fifteen minutes was all it took for the Nu politics to last in Lambeth. The buggers are probably lining up their kiss and tell stories already. If you can’t be sensible, be safe.

Yeah, right…

The second @lambeth_council cabinet meeting of the new administration and any online observer who had downloaded the agenda front sheet in advance would have been caught out.

Whoops.

Bumped up ahead of items including the Schools Exclusion Scrutiny Commission Action Plan, the Council Performance Digest and the Response to Dogs Scrutiny Commission (cripes) were the small matters of the Emergency Budget and Streatham Hub.

Blimey.

It was a collision of cabinet management, or even mis-management, depending on your own political point of view. Judging by the packed attendance in a sultry Room 8 at Lambeth Town Hall, it tended to suggest that the electorate had turned out to witness how the mis-management could best be resolved..

The Emergency Budget has mobilised a broad *shhh* coalition of objectors - Unison, the NUT and even the lovely Lambeth Tories. There was a vocal protest ahead of the meeting, but not much placard waving from the Blue Rinse mob on the steps of the Town Hall.

You can’t but help think that the Union representation is left wondering exactly who is the enemy here - the ConDem coalition for picking up the pieces left by the fag end of the New Labour government, or the local @LambethLabour party that is implementing the public sector cuts locally.

Inside Room 8 and I was greeted with the sight of @lambeth_council Chief Executive Derrick Anderson standing on top of a committee table. Cripes - was the big man about to stage his own one man Chief Exec protest, or perhaps even participate in some table top dancing?

Um, nope - he was simply getting more seats down to accommodate the larger than anticipated angry crowd at cabinet. That’s what I like about Lambeth politics - the big cheese is even doing his bit to appease the Little People.

@cllrstevereed introduced the debate, pointing the finger of blame for the Lambeth cuts on the ConDem coalition government. Councillor McGlone, the Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources followed the lead.

Repeating the Nu Labour manifesto strap line of “we’re on you’re side” [clever] Councillor McGlone pointed out how the BSF and Connexions shortfall in funding are directly accountable to the national government. He was heckled down within the first minute.

Speaking for the @LambethLibDems opposition, Councillor Gavin Dodsworth stated that this was a “shocking introduction to the emergency budget.”

“No figures have been available and so we are not in a position to see if there is a better way of managing these cuts. It is complete gibberish. Lambeth Life has just been given a £1m plus increase in funding, and you have made no reference to the synergies [urgh!] that were pledged in the Lambeth Labour manifesto.”

Conservative Councillor John Whelan was then left in the absurd position to criticise the @LambethLabour cuts, a financial necessity that is of a direct consequence of his own political party. The good Councillor just about got away with it, adding:

“You should have put in place this Emergency Budget before the election, rather than wait to blame the Conservatives. The local Labour party speaks to the media about taking legal action against the BSF programme, but I have yet to see any evidence of this.”

Which is a good point and well put.

But it is at the blunt end of the frontline activity where these savage cuts will be felt the strongest. This is a point recognised by the Unison representative, who like Councillor Whelan, was left with a ridiculous ideological position in criticising a Labour council that is keen to make cuts and redundancies. It’s a funny old business this Nu politics.

“I am so disgusted and angry that it is hard to get my feelings out. A Labour council is planning to make 400 people redundant. This is unforgivable.”

A somewhat tenuous link was then made that this is a racist policy and is in breach of the Race Relations Act. The misguided thinking is that it is ethnic minority staff that will suffer as they are predominantly employed within this sector.

Many things in the Rotten Borough are the direct fault of @LambethLabour, but a wider sociological study linking ethnicity with social status would probably provide a more informed response.

Sarah Thompson of the NUT added:

“It is so frustrating that cabinet has only given me three minutes to talk about over three hundred job losses. The people of Lambeth didn’t vote Labour to be hit by public sector cuts.”

@cllr_robbins, the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People looked elsewhere for the blame, stating:

“The ConDem coalition has taken a wrecking ball to public services. It is the government that is making savage cuts.”

Councillor Jim Dickson, the Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing offered a partial solution:

“I have been in local government for twenty years. It makes sense to make these cuts in bureaucracy rather then frontline services.”

Which is all rather strange, seeing as this is the exact opposite of what @LambethLabour is proposing.

“We need to share the pain fairly. We will be working with our neighbouring boroughs.”

I wonder if this *shhh* co-operation will also include Wandsworth? It would be a shame if in this new spirit of co-operation, @lambeth_council only chose to partner neighbouring boroughs that share the same political persuasion.

Speaking of co-operation - no one actually did. There wasn’t a single mention of #lambethcoop throughout the half hour Emergency Budget debate. Let us not forget that the rolling out of #lambethcoop is all about balancing the books. @cllrstevereed has stated previously:

“The Labour Government and Conservative and Lib Dem parties nationally have signalled significant cuts in public spending after the General Election. The cuts facing local councils could be greater than 20% overall. This means all councils are looking at how they can deliver services differently in future.”

#lambethcoop is all about the budget, isn’t it?

Isn’t it?

The removal of democratic responsibility and accountability of elected councillors would be a mighty high price to pay if the cost-saving agenda wasn’t actually bundled in with #lambethcoop.

It was then left to @cllrstevereed to close the cabinet Emergency Budget debate with the Leader of @lambeth_council arguing:

“We are operating under the constraints of a government of a different [political] colour to us. This doesn’t mean that there won’t be any pain, but we need to minimise this. We will not be making cuts that are not inflicted by the government.”

At least that is what I think @cllrsteverred said. It was difficult to hear underneath all of the heckling.

As with all @lambeth_council matters, the Emergency Budget was passed without debate from the cabinet. No objectors, and the agenda item was ticked off the list.

Deep breath. Here comes Streatham Hub.

Oh Lordy.

Pretty much everything that has to be said about the failed Hub project was spoken @ChukaUmunna‘s People’s Question Time staged in Streatham last week. Listening and answering questions at Dunraven School on Thursday was @QueenFlo, the Cabinet Member for Culture, Sport and the Olympics.

@QueenFlo made no reference at cabinet to the packed People’s Question time that she attended in Streatham less than a week ago. Not one person at @ChukaUmunna’s crisis meeting spoke in support of the Pope’s Road compromise. It seems that the strong message coming out of SW16 wasn’t relayed to cabinet.

Speaking about the plan to shift the temporary ice rink away from Streatham and to Pope’s Road car park in Brixton, Councillor Prentice, the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, admitted that:

“This is not the prefect solution.”

As for swimming in Streatham, @QueenFlo added:

“We did investigate a site for the temporary pool. The priority was always the continuity of ice. We don’t wish to peruse temporary swimming in Streatham.”

Not wishing to peruse swimming seems to be a strong theme within the Rotten Borough right now. The Brixton Rec Users Group have found out on this very same evening that cabinet is now planning to axe free swimming for under-5′s and over 60′s. Where this leaves the @LambethLabour election pledge of “free swimming for every resident” is open to speculation.

But back to Streatham. Or even back to Brixton. @LambethLibDems’ Councillor Alex Davies said:

“This is a further assault on Streatham. Tesco said that it can’t afford to help fund the temporary rink to remain in Streatham.”

This is no laughing matter, although @JackHopkins_Lab, my local Oval councillor, couldn’t but help find some humour in this rather serious point.

Meanwhile, @LambethLabour’s Councillor David Malley spoke as though a loaded gun was pointed towards his head, accepting with no opposition the removal of one of the major cultural and economic landmarks in his Streatham South ward.

A local Streatham swimmer tried to offer his view, but his three minutes at the mic were curtailed somewhat by @cllrstevereed, who was keen to question the swimmer under what capacity he was speaking - a swimmer or as a member of a local political party.

*sigh*

It’s all about the swimming, isn’t it?

Peter Newmark from the very successful Hands Off Our Common group was:

“Happy that the temporary ice rink is not going to be on the Common, but the alternative site should be in Streatham. Brixton has had plenty of regeneration. Streatham remains in relative poverty.”

But it’s not all about Streatham - Brixton is going to take a huge economic hit if Pope’s Road car park becomes a new ice rink. More to the point, Brixton Market will be left to die on its backside.

This was a point ably demonstrated by the Secretary of the Brixton Market Trader’s Association, who brought into cabinet an industrial size packet of rice and a barrel of cooking oil.

The message was that with nowhere to park cars in central Brixton, locals couldn’t be expected to carry such items on public transport. Members of cabinet were invited to road test the weight of the items. I had my camera at the ready, but sadly this was a photo opp that wasn’t going to happen.

“The multi-cultural, working class market will cease to exist” was the claim.

“Shops specialise in selling in bulk. This move is contrary to the council supposed support of the Brixton £. The council PR states that Brixton is Open for Business. Not anymore it isn’t.”

The final word on Streatham Hub was left to Councillor Lib Peck, the Cabinet Member for Housing:

“We need to be clear with Tesco. We need to get out of it what we want, and they need to get out of it what they want.”

Ever danced with the devil in the Devil in the pale moonlight?

And so with apologies to the Schools Exclusion Scrutiny Commission Action Plan, the Council Performance Digest and the Response to Dogs Scrutiny Commission (the decent @imogenwalker showing that her bark is as fierce as her bite) - it really was all about cuts and ice-skating at cabinet.

One of them involves blaming the free market ConDem coalition; the other is all about doing dirty deals with a corporate paymaster to provide a council run service.

See what I’ve done there?

It’s all about cost cutting in the latest, um, cost cutting local council information free (ish) sheet this fortnight. Let’s skip straight away to the Letters page of Lambeth Life, and a penned effort from Charlie Hainsworth of SE24:

“I was impressed to see that in this time of economic constraint and belt tightening, my household’s copy of Lambeth Life cost only 5p to produce.”

Cripes.

I’m not sure if this is faint praise or taking the p*** from young Charlie.

Ella Cope, the esteemed Editor of the cost-cutting local council information free (ish) sheet, replies with some waffle penny-pinching stats, coming to the conclusion that yep, Lambeth Life costs “just over 5p per edition.”

Ella also confirms that the print run is 136,000 copies each fortnight, which by my back of a fag packet calculations makes that something like an annual Lambeth Life overhead of a cool £176,800.

It may not appear much in absolute terms, but in relative terms, that’s a hell of a lot of public money spunked up the wall to put across the voter friendly message of @LambethLabour. In absolute terms, it would keep seven people on the frontline payroll with an annual salary of £25k.

Ella continues:

“…our continuing aim is to be able to produce Lambeth Life for no cost at all to residents.”

Or maybe just don’t produce it at all then.

All of this cost-cutting sets the theme for what is a rip-roaring fortnightly read, which really should carry the strapline of: We’re Broke! Don’t Panic!

In a State of the Nation address, @lambeth_council Chief Executive Derrick Anderson leads on the front page with: Austerity Measures Hit Public Sector Jobs. It’s a softening up of the blow for what lies within. All this talk of austerity and you half expect spam sarnies to be served up at Lambeth Town Hall.

“Currently we know that there will be at least 400 fewer posts across the council in 2011, we will try to address the majority of these through deleting vacant posts and reducing the number of temporary staff working for the organisation.”

Cutting back on the £700 per hour Lambeth Living consultancy staff would be a good start. Speaking of which, there is something of a mixed message coming out of Lambeth Town Hall with regards temporary staff - 46 temporary contracts have apparently been handed out within Lambeth Living.

Whoops.

Let’s flick the page and look for something slightly more positive:

Co-op Commission Announced.

Cripes.

The #lambethcoop presser is then re-published (but only at the cost of an extra 5p per issue…) detailing how the Citizen’s Commission Co-op Commission has finally announced that not a single citizen has been invited to sit at the top table.

Brushing aside the woeful inadequacies in this bodge of a Third Way quango of Nu Labour wonks (WONKS) - what of the stated aims of #lambethcoop?

@cllrstevereed trots out the well-worn line about:

“Reductions on national funding mean we need to drive the community-led agenda forward even faster.”

Steady the buffers, my friend. “Even faster?” It will be a blink and you’ll miss it moment before the consultation is actually complete. Which of course was never the intention all along. Oh no…

And so with the party political blame game being used as justification for @cllrstevereed and his Nu Labour cronies walking away from all democratic accountability, it is only fair that I trot out my well worn line about how #lambethcoop won’t actually save any money.

Actually, nope - I’ll leave that to Ed Balls MP, the highest-ranking Co-operative party MP (stop sniggering,) who actually believes that #lambethcoop will cost MORE money:

“I don’t think it’s a way to save money to be honest. Cutting corners is not what a co-operative council is about. Does being a co-operator save money in public services? I’m not sure that it will. I think that it might actually encourage us to spend more money for local people.”

Council Lobbies to Save Lambeth Schools covers the savage ConDem cuts to the Lambeth BSF programme. Some unlikely alliances have been formed within Town Hall, and it is very decent to see that the local response to the cuts appears to have cross-party support.

Blimey.

“An e-petition [urgh!] has been set up for residents to oppose the cuts. Visit blah blah blah…“

Please do visit and sign the petition. Nope - please *really, really* do visit and sign the petition put online by @LambethLabour. So far only fourteen people in a borough of over 250,000 citizens have. Only another 2,986 more signatures required to trigger a debate at Full Council, under the recent chest beating Power to the People Lambeth Life headline.

A deep *sigh* and then we’re on to Streatham Hub at the bottom of page 3.

Oh Lordy.

Ice Rink Could Come to Brixton reads the headline. This of course details the mega U-turn by the @lambeth_council cabinet in shifting the permanent temporary Streatham Rink away from SW16 and into the voter friendly Brixton power base.

The move down the A23 is all about appeasing Tesco, the corporate paymaster. Lambeth Life recognises this, stating:

“A spokesperson from A Spenhill, the wholly-owned regeneration subsidiary of Tesco, said: We want to make sure that the Tesco store gives customers the best possible shopping experience and that the overall development delivers all the regeneration benefits previously promised.”

Sounds good. Keep talkin’ fella:

“We are therefore making some small changes to our plans.”

Too right, matey - a *small* increased retail space of almost 50%. Meanwhile, the ice pad, swimming pool and dry sports facilities [urgh!] are no nearer now than what they were a decade ago when the whole farce first started.

That’s Life!

This is highly annoying. Captured along the Clap’ham Road during the weekend, the lorry below was blocking the CS7 Cycle Superhighway all day on Saturday.

The regulations governing CS7 makes them a mandatory cycling route, and therefore being out of bounds for other road users, either moving or stationary. Flexibility is of course needed from cyclists and all other road users. But parking and blocking CS7 all day?

The workmen were carrying out repairs to a property along the Clap’ham Road. I appreciate that access to the property is required, but not at the cost of blocking a dedicated cycling lane.

Any approaching cyclist had to swerve way over to the right, and then run the risk of being bumped from behind by oncoming cars that weren’t expecting such a move.

I’m still broadly in favour of CS7. It has made cycling along the Clap’ham Road at least a more visible experience, if not offering total protection.

Time to educate other road users though.

I signed a very worthy petition today. If you have any interest in safeguarding the future of schools in Lambeth, then I suggest you do the same:

“We the undersigned petition the council to lobby the Education Secretary, Rt Hon Michael Gove MP, to immediately restore the funding for Lambeth’s secondary school rebuilding programme, as previously promised by the Government.”

[Declaration of interest - I work in one of the schools that has had the funding withdrawn by the nasty ConDem cuts.]

Of course online petitions are all powerful, especially so in local government circles following the creation of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009.

This piece of legislation, brought in by the fag end of the New Labour administration, compels local authorities to take online petitions seriously. And rightly so - if you can be arsed to fill in an online form, then your opinion must matter.

Lambeth Life even led with this issue last month, proudly declaring this brave new leap into democracy with a Power to the People front-page headline.

Hurrah!

As has already been pointed out, the Power to the People piece was not only a very clumsy PR attempt by our friends from @LambethLabour to bundle the legislation in with #lambethcoop, but the number required to actually make the mechanics of local government sit up and listen are quite alarming:

“Governing arrangements for calling a senior officer to account at an overview and scrutiny meeting open to the public – if requested and at least 1,500 signatures.”

“Governing arrangements for full Council debates – if requested and at least 3000 signatures.”

The petition put out by @LambethLabour on the council’s website currently has eight signatures at the time of publishing this post. Clearly some way to go before Full Council will actually get round to debating the issue.

Of course it would be highly inappropriate for poxy party political points to be gained by springing this issue on the agenda at the Full Council meeting next week. Only another 2,992 signatures required, and there will be democratic justification for forcing a debate, as is the case with any petition put forward by the citizens people.

Just sayin’ like.

How to solve a problem like Streatham Hub? Preferably by keeping local politicians and corporate paymasters out of the whole process. That was pretty much the conclusion come the end of @ChukaUmunna‘s first People’s Question Time, held in the Labour MP’s Streatham constituency on Thursday evening.

The Hub is a headline writer’s gift that keeps on giving. At any one time over the past ten years, stories of mismanagement have surfaced out of SW16.

The latest entry log states that @lambeth_council has now admitted that “plans will not move forward” for the temporary swimming pool in Streatham, and Tesco stating that “Lambeth Council has compromised in choosing Pope’s Road as a site for the temporary ice rink.”

Cripes.

The Hub saga story so far…

In a classic you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours scenario, the corporate superstore was granted planning permission in Streatham, in return for building a new leisure centre and a new ice rink. So far, so good.

The trouble is that this was almost ten years ago. The scheme is filled with as much uncertainty a decade later as it was back in the day. The timeline up until 2010 has included Tesco holding all the cards and threatening to walk away unless an increased floor space was granted, the closure (and failure to re-open) of Streatham Leisure Centre and the continued search for a temporary ice rink in Streatham.

Ah yes - about that Streatham Brixton temporary ice rink. It is the “continuity of ice” clause in the original planning document that led the good @ChukaUmunna to hold this current crisis meeting.

Essentially Tesco has to provide an ice pad at all times in Streatham. This was fine with the original agreement, which involved constructing the brand new rink on the Hub site, and then knocking down the old barn.

The corporate paymaster became impatient however, and wanted to bulldoze the site with one great big swing of the wrecking ball. Meanwhile @lambeth_council was left looking rather silly, searching around for a suitable site in an urban borough to place a whopping great big temporary ice pad.

The packed assembly hall at Dunraven School on Thursday night was unanimous in rejecting @lambeth_council’s current plan to shift Streatham Ice Rink down the A23 to Pope’s Road Car Park in Brixton.

This has emerged as the U-turn choice from the @LambethLabour cabinet, after the whole community united against the bonkers plan to place the ice pad on Streatham Common.

“This is a highly emotive issue,” admitted @ChukaUmunna at the start of the People’s Question Time. “There is a perception in the community that residents have been held in the dark over recent months.”

Sandra Fryer, representing the council as the Divisional Director of Strategies and Partnerships stated:

“We have been working with Tesco since March on the location. Streatham Common had processing issues [eh?] - it would have taken us longer than we wanted to place the rink here. There were also technical issues. It wasn’t clear where the power source would come from.”

You would have hoped that before rubber-stamping the Streatham Common site back in March, cabinet would have had the foresight to address basic issues such as where the power for the ice pad was going to come from.

A solution is available, slightly closer to home than the Pope’s Road compromise.

“We also looked at a site on Streatham High Road,” admitted Fryer. “Tesco have a budget however, and weren’t able to progress with this option.”

And so it seems that Pope’s Road became the preferred location on account of @lambeth_council already owning the site. Two birds can be killed with one stone, by demolishing the structurally unsafe council car park, and then plonking the ice pad there instead.

The fear for the Streatham skating and hockey community however is that Pope’s Road becomes permanent, and the south end of the borough loses one of it’s most historic and cultural sites of interest forever.

Having skipped the previous Streatham Hub public meeting, it was decent for the corporate paymaster to turn up this time. Mike Kissman, the UK Corporate Affairs Manager for Tesco, told the meeting:

“Running an ice rink is not something that we have a great deal of experience in.”

Best learn on the job then, Mr Corporate Affairs Man. Tesco will be financing the temporary pad and is expected to either manage the facility itself, or put in place a management team that is capable of the job.

Questions then followed from the floor.

“The plans for Streatham Hub have chopped and changed so much, what guarantees can you give this meeting that this won’t happen again?”

Apt timing for the fashionably late arrival of Councillor Florence Nosegbe, the Cabinet Member for Culture, Sport and the Olympics:

“We own Pope’s Road - we can control the process. It will be easier for the council to move forward.”

Tesco’s Kissman added:

“Time is the issue for Tesco.”

You can bet it is. Every week that Tesco hasn’t got a superstore open in Streatham is a week where the competitors along the High Road are rubbing their hands and lining their tills. Plus it’s, ahem, a little late in the day for Tesco to be complaining about the Hub timeline after a decade of dithering.

A speaker from the floor came back to the location of the temporary rink, and picked up on the point why Pope’s Road has been chosen, rather than the High Road location:

“With annual profits recently revealed, plus with the planned increased of 20,000 extra floor space at Streatham, Tesco is not exactly light of wallet right now. Why can’t the company pay to finance the staging of the temporary rink along the High Road?”

This question achieved the loudest applause of the evening, if not the most adequate of answers:

“We have been through difficult times,” said Kissman. “We are still here. We are an organisation, and not a local authority.”

Which all rather begs the question who is actually controlling leisure in Lambeth? The local authority that is reliant upon the private capital to finance the schemes, or the private capital paymaster that won’t be accountable?

Jimmy Gardner from the Streatham Chiefs Ice Hockey team then made an impassioned speech:

“We had a show of hands this week. If Streatham Ice Rink moves to Pope’s Road then my club will fold. This then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy - there is no demand for ice hockey in Streatham, and so there is no need to build a rink back in SW16.”

“Why won’t you work with other local councils?” asked another question. “If Lambeth Council actually spoke to the likes of the neighbouring Merton Council, you might actually find a site closer to home.”

Other observations from the floor centred on the Brixton location, with accusations that “the Lambeth cabinet is not visible in Streatham. Everything has to be Brixton based.”

The meeting then moved on to discuss dimensions - dimensions of the temporary ice pad and dimensions of possible parking space at Pope’s Road.

Councillor Nosegbe confirmed that the temporary pad will be 56m x 26m in dimension - a size smaller than a standard hockey pad, and a space that is unsuitable for figure skating, as the mother of a Streatham skater pointed out.

The @LambethLabour Councillor also confirmed that there is the “possibility” of parking for twenty spaces at Pope’s Road. The average hockey team benches twenty-five players.

Finally we came on to the Elephant in the Streatham meeting road - swimming.

Oh Lordy.

With all the focus on the temporary ice pad, swimming has been overlooked in Streatham. Swimming has been overlooked in all of Lambeth over the past four years, if truth be told.

Whereas ice time had a continuity clause in the Hub deal, swimming has historically not been treated to this privilege. This is probably because @lambeth_council wasn’t expecting to close Streatham Leisure Centre late last year, without an alternative plan in place.

Councillor Nosegbe said:

“I recognise that there has been an under-investment in the pool. We don’t have the funds for a temporary arrangement in Streatham. We won’t be going forward with this.”

Where all of this leaves the @LambethLabour election manifesto pledge of “free swimming for every resident” is somewhat uncertain right now.

A final question pondered: “What will happen at the cabinet meeting on Monday night?”

The implication within the question was whether or not Councillor Nosegbe would report back to her @LambethLabour friends on the strength of feeling against the Pope’s Road compromise that is currently being felt within Streatham.

The reality of course is that the @LambethLabour cabinet will have a friendly chit chat on Monday evening, and the temporary ice pad will be agreed to be put in place at Pope’s Road in under half an hour after the meeting has commenced.

The real question however is will the Pope’s Road rink ever actually open, and more importantly, will @ChukaUmunna still be holding his People’s Question Time in five, ten years time, still pondering the Streatham Hub question?