The Lost Highway, or: the road to Broken Barnet, May 2014

                                        Now, boys, don't start your ramblin' round 
                                        On this road of sin or you're sorrow bound 
                                        Take my advice or you'll curse the day 
                                        You started rollin' down that lost highway 
Hank Williams

http://wwwbrokenbarnet.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/scandalous-barnet-councils-million.html

and the revelation of what is undeniably an absolute scandal - the disproportionate allocation of funding from Barnet Council's Highways budget, in the course of which some wards have inexplicably been given hugely generous handouts, and others, such as in the case of Labour held Colindale Ward this year - not a single penny. 

The allocation of the Highways budget funding was, until Tory Cabinet member Dean Cohen took over from Brian Coleman, allocated equally between wards. He changed the system, supposedly so as to dispense the money ... erm, what was it - ah yes, ... according to 'need'. 

Earlier this year, Coleman alleged that Cohen had spent more than £800,000 on his own ward of Golders Green. Mrs Angry submitted a Freedom of Information request to verify the level of expenditure on a ward by ward basis, and the response was truly stunning: in two years Golders Green Ward had been awarded a staggering £1.6 million - one million alone in the last year, the year before the current election. 

The disparity in the level of spending was plain to see, and is is clear that the most favoured wards tend to be Conservative held, or potentially marginal. 

By contrast to the million pounds plus given this year to Golders Green, Colindale, a Labour held ward with areas of social deprivation, Colindale, despite long standing requests from local councillors, received absolutely nothing. After these revelations, a local councillor complained about this matter to the Chief Executive. Weeks later, and there has been no adequate response. 

It would appear that such a reluctance to respond might be because there is nothing that Mr Travers can say in defence of what is clearly an indefensible situation: that the Labour voting residents of Colindale are subsidising the expenditure on pavements and roads of the residents of Tory Golders Green. 

Mrs Angry therefore decided to submit another Freedom of Information request, this time asking for a breakdown of expenditure of the £1.6 million that Councillor Dean Cohen allocated to his own ward, over the last two years, since he changed from a system of equal allocation to one based on 'need'. The response to this request is simply incredible.

Here is the expenditure: I have added the postcode to the addresses, for reasons which will become clear.

2012/2013

Footway - relay

Heathfield Gardens NW11          £69,281,07
Hurstwood Road NW11               £89,515,93
Hurstwood Road NW11               £70,305,79

Carriageway Resurfacing

Tilling Road NW2                       £50,057,45
Prayle Grove NW2                     £22,241,54
Heathfield Gardens NW11         £51,833,56
Highfield Avenue NW11             £200,506,58

2013/2014

Footway Renewal

Western Avenue NW11              £42,450,37   
Princes Park Avenue NW11      £296,663,58
Woodlands NW11                        £242,991,06
Gloucester Gardens NW11        £70,853,22
Woodlands Close NW11              £58,295,75

Carriageway Resurfacing

Claremont Road NW2               £68,166,45
Hurstwood Road NW11             £36,160,00
Princes Park AvenueNW11      £231,650,00

You will note that the lowest payments are to roads in the NW2 area. This is the less affluent part of the Golders Green ward, lying west of the Hendon Way. Tilling Road, in fact, is the location of the Mapledown School for disabled children, which has just had its vital respite care schemes cut thank to the Tory councillors, including Schools cabinet member Reuben Thompstone, who is a local councillor but had never visited Mapledown. A forgotten part of the ward, it might appear.

Most of the roads which have received rather more generous handouts from the Highways budget are in a relatively small area, north of the Golders Green Road, an area where Councillor Dean Cohen himself lives.

Most fortunate of all are the residents of Princes Park Avenue, who have been handed nearly £530,000 in two years for their roads and pavements.

To put this in perspective, let us take another look at the graph showing the distribution of Highways funding in all wards, across two years: 

 

You will see that the total amount of funding given to one road in Councillor Cohen's own ward amounts to the same total given to some wards over two years,  in entirety. 

Libdem stronghold Childs Hill received less than Princes Park Avenue - around £488, 000, the Labour ward of East Finchley - £322,000. And of course the Labour  ward of Colindale received only £92,936.

The highly marginal ward of Hale has been given a particularly large amount of funding, second only to Councillor Cohen's own ward in Golders Green. This must of course be a coincidence, and it is unfortunate that in both cases, Hale and Golders Green, according to Mrs Angry's spies, for some reason the work which this funding has paid for is still continuing in the last few days before the election, a reminder to all voters, of course, that their council is keen to facilitate their easy route to the nearest polling station. We wouldn't want any voter to trip on their way, would we? Unless they live in Colindale, or East Finchley.

After Mrs Angry brought this interesting distribution of funds to the attention of certain Labour councillors who were given continual excuses from officers as to why their own Highways related improvements were not forthcoming, one member made a complaint to the Chief Executive, and asked for an explanation. Oh dear. Tactless. And there is apparently still a problem in formulating a full response, despite the involvement of Mrs Angry's favourite officer, Ms Pam Wharfe.

Ms Wharfe's excuse for the lack of funds for Colindale was:

all roads and pavements works are evaluated on need therefore there should simply have been roads and pavements in a worse position elsewhere. Clearly a lot of work is being done in 2013/14 on Lanacre Avenue in relation to regeneration works connected to Grahame Park.

Mmm. Clearly. That would explain everything.

Oh, and then ... there is this briefing on a four year expenditure plan, which may or may not tally with what actually was distributed, but tells you something about their intentions:

All that dosh for Totteridge? Interesting to see the winners and losers, compared to this projection, isn't it?

At the last Audit meeting, the Chair suggested that any concerns that the disparity in Highways expenditure was unlawful should be referred to the External Auditor.

What do you think of that, readers?

But anyway, here we are, on the eve of the election, and all is up for grabs, at least in theory. The truth is that the Tories are flailing about, unable to present anything to offer the voters - too frightened even to mention the mass privatisation of council services that they have overseen in the course of the last administration, with no mandate, or consultation with residents - and shrinking in fear of the impact of blunders like the parking policy, the allowance rise they awarded themselves, the support they gave to Brian Coleman, the cuts to disabled children's respite care, the handing over of Hendon Crematorium to the profiteering sweaty hands of Capita.

Their manifesto, such as it is, only surfaced in the latter days of the campaign, and what a cracker it is:

The Tories promise -

Low council tax (even if they have to take the money away from disabled children)
New school places ( for children out of the borough who get through the selective entrance exams of the best scoring schools in Barnet)
A green borough (what is left after providing more potential sites for developers, or in the case of our parks, pimping our open spaces for commercial hire)
Better roads and pavements (ha! Good one: see above - only applies in Tory/marginal wards)
New homes (if you are 'well off', preferably a Russian oligarch, or lucky enough to be allocated one of the three new council houses, the first for 22 years).

No mention, of course, of any extension in the privatisation of our council services, which is absolutely guaranteed, should the Tories return to power.
 
The campaign for the local election has had the Tory administration fighting a rearguard action, of course, with nowhere to go. What could they say, to defend their record in power, and persuade residents to vote for more of the same? They managed to return in 2010 by not informing voters of their plans to privatise council services, and then refusing to consult on those plans. They know only how to impose policy, not how to work in partnership with their own electorate, and respect their views. 

The last four years in which they have been in control of Barnet has been marked by a virtual civil war, between an increasingly politicised and well informed opposition of activists, bloggers and campaign groups, a guerrilla war, striking right at the heart of the Conservative agenda, and continually disrupting what they thought would be the easy installation of an easycouncil regime, a flagship borough, and a new model of local government.

From easycouncil, to Futureshape, to One Barnet: then as the toxic brand became too much to deal with, the privatisation of this borough became merely 'a change programme', a euphemism discreetly murmured by Tory leader Richard Cornelius, with all the discretion and unctuousness of a handwringing undertaker, perfectly cast in the era of Easycrem, and the Capita way of death that we now must subscribe to.

Such is the level of concern over the failure to convey to the ungrateful voters of Broken Barnet the magnificent achievements of our Tory council, in one ward, key to electoral success, they have had to call on the help of local Tory MP, the godfather of easycouncil himself, Mike Freer. 

This is Childs Hill, traditionally held by the Libdems, but now Lord and Lady Palmer are standing down, Tories have convinced themselves that they have the natural first call on the ward, as indeed have Labour. Which party is right? Or will the ward remain loyally Libdem? (Yes, I know, but I like Jack Cohen, and would like him at least to return, as frankly he is the only councillor in Barnet with any wit, and intellect).

Freer did his best to help his Tory colleagues by sending out a 'survey' about the Mansion  Tax, and trying to frighten what the Tories imagine to be the great hoardes of wealthy mansion owning residents who might resent paying their fair share of contribution to the public purse. Tax, you should remember, for Barnet Tories, is an anathema, and teh principle should apply only to poor people, who should stop moaning about the Bedroom Tax, because it does not exist, and anyway they are poor, which is their fault.

This 'survey' has got Freer into trouble, because he is alleged to have misused parliamentary resources for electoral purposes, and will now face an investigation into the matter. But what is telling about this is it shows the Tories have misread the situation and made assumptions about residents which are inaccurate: in fact most people in Barnet are hard working people who aspire to own their own homes, and feel no sympathy for those owning properties worth £2 million or more. The very phrase 'Mansion Tax' is guaranteed to alienate most of the voters they need to persuade to support them.

Their fatal error, the Barnet Tories, is that they confuse the interests of those who make the biggest donations to their party with the ordinary residents whose lives have become so much harder over the last few years. 

Aside from the demands of austerity, the residents and traders of Barnet have been incensed by the parking fiasco, by the arrogance of Brian Coleman, and the failure of his former colleagues to sanction his behaviour: they do not approve of cuts to disabled schools in order to pay for a 23 pence a week tax 'gesture', and they most certainly do not want to see their local crematorium run for profit. 

They don't care about the tax burden of absentee home owners in Bishops Avenue, and yet even if they are not directly affected themselves, they see the injustice of the Tory housing policy, and the immorality of trying to make profit from the provision  of care to the disabled.

In short, the inherent decency of most people in this borough has reached the extent of tolerance that they can bestow on the Tory councillors of Broken Barnet. Tomorrow they have a chance to make their opinions count: let's hope they do just that. 

Over the last four years, I have chronicled the story of this Conservative administration, in loving detail, all for your reading pleasure. 

What a story it has been: one long tale of incompetence, immorality, greed, laziness, inertia, corruption, hypocrisy, and abject submission to the influence of private interests, conflict of interests, and swivel eyed lunacy, promulagated by a bunch of neo Thatcherite, doltheaded Tory councillors who care more about prancing about in a set of moth eaten mayoral robes, and stuffing their tupperware boxes with goodies from the corporate buffet table, than they do about the residents facing real hardship as a direct result of their own policies, and those of the Tory government they support.

The real Tory manifesto is there, for all to see: what they have done, and what they have failed to do, and what they will do if they return to power. 

I never intended to carry on writing this blog as long as I have - frankly I have had more than enough, and would welcome the chance to escape Broken Barnet. 

If Labour take control of the borough tomorrow, Mrs Angry can retire, and I can run away. 

Do me a favour, please, and put me out of my misery, the only way that counts - vote Labour, and kick the likes of Richard Cornelius, Robert Rams, Tom Davey, Dean Cohen and all the rest of the fecking eejits that have hijacked this borough, and got us travelling on the lost highway, right up the *rse.

Thank you.

This was Broken Barnet.

It's up to you, what happens next.

And this one is for you, Councillor Cohen - enjoy: 

                      

Church Farmhouse: closed by Tory councillors, ransacked, left to rot - now robbed and vandalised

Updated below: Barnet Council shuts the gate, after the horse has bolted ...

Apart from the election, Mrs Angry, is there anything much going on in Broken Barnet, this week? 

Well, yes: Finchley Literary Festival, which will run from the 24th May, to the 31st. 

 http://greenacrewriters.blogspot.co.uk/p/finchley-literary-festival.html

Rather foolishly, Mrs Angry has agreed to take part, and is giving a talk, on the 28th, on what is supposed to be about Charles Dickens and his associations with the borough, but has got a bit sidetracked by related stories of bodysnatching, Dracula, slaveowning vicars, death in the workhouse,  demon postmen ... and an Irish bootmaker who asked Dickens for a loan of £1500 to buy the manor house, and - and  if you want to know more, you will have to come along.

So, doing some research in the British Library yesterday, by chance Mrs Angry found herself reading a biography of Mark Lemon, the first editor of Punch, very good friend of Dickens, and who spent what he considered to be an idyllic childhood living with his grandparents at Church Farmhouse, in Hendon. 

In later life Lemon often remembered Hendon with great fondness, and wrote about his memories of life in what was then a rural area, his grandfather farming 200 acres, and living next door to the old Greyhound inn, still there, of course, and the ancient church of St Mary's. 

Mark Lemon

Funnily enough, Tory leader Richard Cornelius has always struck Mrs Angry as bearing a notable facial resemblance to Mr Punch.  

But perhaps the satirical allusion is one which springs too easily to the eye, to those of us living here, in Broken Barnet.

 Totteridge, May 2010

The seventeenth century, Grade II* listed Farmhouse was bought by the local council in 1944, and became a museum in 1954.

In May 2014, the building stands empty, and decaying, having been closed three years ago, in order for our Tory councillors to flog it off for development. With great glee they ransacked the Museum's collection of local historical artefacts, threw some in a skip, gave others away, and auctioned the rest off in a church hall in the midlands.

Their enthusiasm for selling the Farmhouse, however, was misguided, and buyers for a delicate, protected building of this rarity have, unsurprisingly, proven too few. The joke is, of course, that our would be true blue entrepreneurs and property speculators have no business sense at all, which is why they allowed themselves to be so easily led by the nose over so many financial cock ups, especially the Capita contracts, swallowing such stories as the one about £16 million capital investment, and spending £80 million to make £160 million savings. In truth none of them could run a jellied eel stall and make a penny of profit, let alone an authority of this size. No wonder they wanted to delegate everything to the private sector.

The Museum now stands forlorn, abandoned, empty, and neglected, to such an extent that English Heritage have listed its status now as vulnerable. 

It was only the fear of occupation by squatters, as in the case of Friern Barnet Library, moved the council - eventually - to take on any security precautions to protect the building. A company ominously named 'Ad Hoc' supplied a 'live-in' guardian, for whom the council has just installed a shower room, with no regard for the sensitivity and integrity of the listed building's features.

It may be that the guardian in question is spending too much time in his new shower, sadly, as it has been reported that some time on Sunday night/Monday morning, around ten of the old yorkstone paving flags around the Farmhouse were dug up, and stolen. As local GLA member Andrew Dismore commented today:

"This is the inevitable consequence of the Conservative Council’s closure of the museum, and after over 3 years, their inability to find someone to take it on. Their so-called negotiations with Middlesex University are going nowhere, as it is clear they are not really interested in taking over this historic listed building because its uses are so limited. 

An empty unused building like this is an open invitation for thieves. 

The Council has been and is spending thousands on security at the former Museum, for little good it does; and Boris Johnson’s cuts in the police service haven’t helped either. 

The Council should be ashamed of themselves. they will have to replace the missing flags at no doubt considerable expense to the council taxpayers of Barnet, but it is difficult to see how new stones will be able to replicate the appearance of the stolen old ones. Conservative Barnet could not care less about our Borough’s history and historic buildings". 

Andrew Dismore, Labour candidate and former museum curator Gerrard Roots, and Labour councillor Arjun Mittra

During the course of the last four years, the Farmhouse has stood as a permanent indictment, a metaphor in stone, of the moral decay and incompetence of this ghastly, philistine, materialist Tory administration, where nothing is of value unless it can be sold in a market place, and heritage, history, and a sense of community is utterly redundant.

In this week, in which we go to vote for a new administration, it is with perfect timing that we witness the building robbed off part of the very fabric of its own history. It's no worse a crime, in the view of Mrs Angry, than being robbed of the museum, and an intrinsic part of the story of Hendon, and this borough, by councillors elected to protect our best interests, not sell our heritage to the highest bidder - or rather try to, but fail ingloriously even at their own intentions.

The plaque commemorating Mark Lemon's connection with Church Farmhouse is still there, on the empty building. It will mean nothing to the Tory councillors who closed it, and who won't have heard of Lemon, or care. 

But then again, after Thursday, some of the leading Tory councillors who were responsible for closing Church Farmhouse, standing in marginal wards, will themselves be history.

Updated:

According to Mrs Angry's spies, Barnet Council, with a typical display of masterly timing, has now acted to secure the gate to the Farmhouse ...
At some point this afternoon Barnet council chained and padlocked shut the front gates to the Museum, because of the theft of Yorkstone flags from the Museum's paths last Sunday. This will not deter thieves- they'll just bring along a pair of bolt-cutters. However, it will needlessly inconvenience residents and visitors who rightly expect to be able to access a much-used public right of way through a public garden set in a designated conservation area.

One Barnet: 'a brand that has served its purpose' - let's take back control of our democracy, say Barnet's bloggers

Over the last few years, the activities of the current Conservative administration in Barnet have been closely monitored and reported by a group of bloggers, determined to hold to account the elected members who have so blatantly defied the principle of democratic government, and fundamentally betrayed the best interests of the residents of this borough.

We have covered every faltering step of the course followed by the Tory councillors, from their first act, on being re-elected, and lecturing residents and staff on the stark economies necessitated by the demands of austerity, but voting themselves a big fat rise in their own allowances, closely followed by the MetPro scandal, a theme which set the tone for the next four years.

The MetPro affair involved the use by the Tory council of an illegally operating private security company, which barred residents from a council meeting, secretly filmed local bloggers and activists, had close contact with vulnerable children, and was being rewarded by casual but substantial payments, in the total absence of any contractual agreement.

Barnet’s bloggers subsequently revealed that far from being a single case of failure in proper regulation of procurement and contractual management, the council had thousands of legally non-compliant arrangements.

Local tax payers’ hard earned cash had been given away in these agreements, unquestioned: a real scandal, and on an unimaginably wide scale.

The next outrage we reported was perhaps one we should have foreseen: the silencing of dissent at all residents’ meetings, with enforced censorship rules, backed by a deliberate amendment to the local constitution,  meaning no member of the public was allowed to criticise, or even refer to anything deemed to be ‘council policy’.

The reason for this soon became clear.

Barnet was to be privatised, with a massive outsourcing programme, from which an in-house solution was excluded because, we were told, we needed a large amount of capital investment from a commercial partner.

There had been no mention of these plans in the 2010 Conservative manifesto.

Despite the lack of mandate, the Tory administration pushed these plans through, at the behest of senior management and private consultants.

Needless to say, as well as failing to present these plans to residents at the time of election, there was no consultation over the privatisation: a serious breach of regulations, and one criticised in the High Court by Judge Underhill last year.

Another policy imposed by Barnet Tories that was brought to account in the High Court was the catastrophic parking policy, which overnight sent the borough’s high streets into fatal decline, and alienated vast sections of the Conservatives’ own natural electoral base.

The Barnet Conservative manifesto for the 2014 elections is even more enigmatic than the version they offered voters four years previously.

When asked by the Barnet Press why there was no mention of One Barnet leader Richard Cornelius declared that it is a brand that ‘has served its purpose’.

Indeed it has, but whose purpose, and for whose benefit?

Certainly not the residents and taxpayers of Barnet.

Already we have seen the real motives of Capita exposed by their attempts to begin the commercial exploitation of this borough in the form of the development of ‘memorialisation’ of the dead in Hendon Crematorium, and the grossly insensitive removal of benches commemorating loved ones in the grounds, taken away and dumped in a corner of the grounds.

It seems an apt metaphor for the exploitation of our borough, by private enterprise, at our expense, sanctioned by our Conservative councillors.

         

And we must ask - if the privatisation of our borough, and the sell off to Capita of our local services has been so successful, why are Barnet Tories not rejoicing in this fact, and sharing their sense of satisfaction with voters? Why are they being so evasive about the real plans that they intend to impose, should they be returned to office this coming week?

Is it because the One Barnet brand is now so toxic, it must be dropped, and forgotten, and voters duped into approving another Tory council whose agenda is unstated, but is clearly going to endorse the privatisation of council service and expand this policy wherever possible?

We have read this week of plans to privatise child protection services. There can be little doubt that if they are returned to office, without consulting residents, Barnet Tories will be likely to extend the process of privatisation to any other council function they care to delegate. And increased pressure to make massive savings will inevitably lead to cuts in services on a scale as yet unprecedented.

There will, of course, be no proposal to deprive themselves of the same level of allowance they still enjoy, despite the limited function they will retain, in a borough where our vital services will be run not for our benefit, with direct control by them, but by a private company, for profit, at our expense.

In the accompanying footage here,John Dix, blogger Mr Reasonable explains why the takeover by Capita of our council services presents such a threat to the wellbeing of our borough, and what the future will hold for all of us in Barnet, should the Conservative administration be re-elected this week.

         

The choice for voters on May 22^nd is clear – vote Conservative, approve the delegation of control of your borough to private enterprise, and the shareholders of Capita – or take a stand, and begin to reclaim your democratic right to control your own destiny.

Derek Dishman

John Dix

Theresa Musgrove

Roger Tichborne

Things can only get ... worse: Barnet bloggers' joint letter to the local press, and Easycrem in Private Eye

Open up this week's local Times' letter page and you will find a joint letter from the Barnet bloggers, ie Mr Mustard, Mr Reasonable, Mr Tichborne, and Mrs Angry, vaguely on the theme of impending disaster, should the voters of Broken Barnet be reckless enough to vote the current assortment of Tory knaves, fools and hangers on back into power.

Here is a copy of the letter:

The Conservative administration that is seeking re-election later this month is clearly struggling to find reasons that might persuade residents of Barnet to vote their party back into power. They appear to be resorting to the tactic of rewriting history, in the form of interesting letters to the local press, and retaining a discreet silence on the matter of some less than welcome publicity given to their own policies in action.

First of all we note the letter written by Tory leader Richard Cornelius, in which he preposterously tries to claim that Friern Barnet Library – closed with the consent of the Conservative councillors – was in fact saved not by the occupation of squatters and a determined campaign by local residents, but by the actions of one of his own Tory colleagues.

Councillor Cornelius and his fellow councillors not only resort to rewriting history, but show a talent for creative fiction by continually failing to refer directly to the One Barnet programme, through which it has given charge of most of our council services to Capita, a private company, and speaking only of ‘a change programme’, which they claim has already delivered savings to local taxpayers. 

In fact the council is contractually bound to endorse and publicise the ‘success’ of the Capita contract – even before it is known if indeed the huge gamble represented by this agreement is delivering the promises so easily made during the tender process.

The real success of these contracts and the privatisation of our services will be in delivering huge profits to the shareholders of Capita, at the expense of local residents, whose services are no longer under the direct control of councillors, and a democratic system of  management, but subject to market forces.

Nothing could better illustrate the future we face as a result of these contracts than what is happening right now at Hendon Crematorium, which was added to the privatisation package as an ‘attraction’ to bidders, as there are lucrative profits to be made from introducing new charges from the death and bereavement of local residents. All of this is clearly detailed in the contract agreed and signed by our Conservative councillors, although it is known that few of them actually read in any depth the terms of the contract they were approving.

As revealed by the Times last week, Capita has begun a programme of removing memorial benches from the area surrounding the Garden of Remembrance at the Crematorium.

In the article it was claimed this is because of the state of disrepair of the benches.

In fact a visit to the grounds demonstrates this is not the case, and that the notices placed on so many benches states they are being removed for ‘development’ and ‘further memorialisation’. 

No doubt this development will include new charges for new memorials, and their maintenance - and healthy revenue for the shareholders of Capita.

There are already dozens of benches removed and dumped in a corner of the grounds, which is clearly a deeply insensitive way to treat what are for grieving family members perhaps the only mark of their deceased loved ones.

The distress that this programme will cause bereaved families, especially those who come to visit the grounds and find their benches and memorials have been removed, is indefensible.

The gross act of disrespect this shows in regard to the deceased residents whose memory these benches commemorate is truly appalling, and a perfect metaphor for the ruthless exploitation of our council services, sanctioned by this heartless Tory council.

Only recently we saw Mapledown School for disabled children lose vital funding as a result of the Conservative pre-election tax cut, which gave 23 pence a week back to residents, but at the cost of removing desperately needed support from exhausted parents in need of respite care for their children.

Tory councillor Reuben Thompstone attempted to deflect attention away from his own responsibility for these dreadful cuts by claiming in a letter that the school could easily afford to subsidise the respite schemes with money from its own reserves. In fact as he should have known, the school is simply not allowed to do so.

With this new attack on bereaved relatives, the true face of Conservative politics is revealed, and if this administration is returned to power, one thing is absolutely certain: there can only be worse to come.

Yours sincerely,

Derek Dishman

John Dix

Theresa Musgrove

Roger Tichborne

And yet again the antics of our Tory councillors have been rewarded by another story in Private Eye: hard to keep us out of the Eye, in fact: Rotten Boroughs could function entirely on the supply of jaw dropping tales from Barnet. This time it is, hardly surprisingly, the shameless start to Capita's grossly distasteful plans to screw as much profit as possible from their management of Hendon Crematorium:

Note to Crapita: Mrs Angry may have one of your blogger's discounted, pre-used grave waiting for her, but she is doing her damnedest to avoid the risk of going to heaven, especially if you're in charge.

More likely you actually won the tender for the other place, though, isn't it?

Sympathy for the devil, anyone?

Mr Postman, look and see - if there's a polling card in your bag for me, or - Mr Dismore visits TNT and asks some awkward questions

Mrs Angry brought to your attention, not so long ago, some very worrying evidence that suggested problems and delays in  the processing of electoral registration, and further difficulties posed by the risk of failure in postal deliveries, thanks to Barnet Council's use of TNT to deliver mail, instead of, as was previously the case, the Royal Mail.

Senior council officers have insisted there are no delays in registration, and in contradiction to staff, claimed there have been no 'backlogs' in processing any electoral forms. Yet Mrs Angry received a letter six weeks after sending in her own form, informing her that officers were now 'satisfied' she could be added to the register, sometime in May - hopefully before polling day, which would be nice. 

Whether waiting from March until May, and then only finding Mrs Angry's form after going through 'thousands' of others, after being told to by senior officers is not sign of a backlog is of course not for Mrs Angry to say.

Stories about the unreliability of TNT deliveries abound, and pose a direct threat to the electoral process here in Barnet: we have seen post dumped by the riverside, wrongly delivered electoral material, abandoned bikes, and missing polling cards. 

And then yesterday Labour GLA member Andrew Dismore issued this press release:

Dismore takes to task TNT managers

Andrew Dismore,  Labour London Assembly member and parliamentary candidate for Hendon, met senior TNT managers at their Colindale depot on 12/5/14, to see what they had to say in answer to  the poor performance of TNT since they started deliveries in Hendon at the end of February.

Mr Dismore raised  the many  complaints he had received, including the misdelivery of election poll cards, letters being delivered to one address for the whole street, and dumped mail, as well as security issues when post was left unlocked in bicycle panniers and TNT operatives riding on the pavement.

After the meeting Mr Dismore said:

“The managers were very apologetic and anxious to provide reassurance. They have sophisticated monitoring and tracking systems and equipment, but these systems are only as good as the TNT operatives themselves.

“They are starting from scratch and clearly have had difficulties with the “blind leading the blind” in setting up their rounds. They cannot match the 350 years’ knowledge of the Royal Mail whose experienced posties are aware of all the difficult addresses to find on their walks. No wonder TNT staff end up asking passers by for directions!

“TNT gave clear assurances that they will not be involved in any more deliveries of  sensitive election material for the 22^nd May  elections. The problem with  poll cards  arose  as the  result of a long chain of privatisation subcontracting  decisions.  Conservative Barnet Council contracted out the election distribution organisation to a company, FDM, instead of directly using the Royal Mail. FDM in turn contracted to TNT. TNT then decided to further subcontract the delivery back to the Royal Mail, where it should have been in the first place!

“It is no surprise  that things  went wrong, as one day’s deliveries instead of being passed to Royal Mail by TNT went to their own operatives instead. The net result  is that some people  in a key Council election  marginal ward did not receive their poll cards. In what is likely to be a tight election that could change the result, as the Council are refusing to reissue the poll cards that went astray. After the administration problems at the last General Election which affected the result, you would have thought the Council would have learned the lessons, but clearly they haven’t or simply don’t care.

“After recruitment direct from the Job Centre or the Work Programme, in my view part of the problem is that TNT’s 86 Colindale staff are all newly employed, on zero hours contracts without fixed hours and are paid by the hour. They only get a fixed hours contract after a year’s service. 

“The managers say security is a priority and their operatives should not ride their bikes on the pavement, and that this is  a training issue  for them , but this is a  common occurrence- indeed as I left their building I saw this happening!

“TNT are anxious to hear about problems with their service, so if residents have problems or complaints with undelivered or misdirected mail, or see TNT operatives riding on the pavement or leaving post unlocked and unattended, they should  let me know and I will pass the complaints  on.

“At the end of my lengthy visit and discussion with TNT I was also amazed to hear that TNT had invited Hendon’s Conservative MP to meet them to talk about his concerns, but he failed to respond.  Clearly he is not as worried about TNT’s performance as I am.

“I will be raising the issue of TNT at the next London Assembly Mayor’s Question Time as the Mayor who welcomed Dutch company TNT to the capital must get involved in ensuring the service is delivered properly and securely.”

 
The frankly ludicrous situation described in the press release regarding the devolved chain of contractual arrangements for delivery of the electoral post is a simple demonstration of what goes so horribly wrong when a service is privatised, and standards plummet: a perfect metaphor, in fact, for the reckless gamble our Tory councillors have taken in the massive One Barnet privatisation - you know, the 'change programme' that must not be named, or even referred to, in their own feeble election 'manifesto' for fear of - fear of what, actually? 

If Barnet Tories are so proud of what they have done, pimping our council to Crapita, and laying us out, the living and the dead,  to be screwed by them for every penny of profit, well - why not be out and proud about it? 

Is it because already, as we have seen in the disgraceful Crematorium affair, and the cock ups with council tax, payroll, taxcodes, and the phone lines, residents are beginning to see the real impact of private profit on the local services on which they depend? 

Too toxic a thought to associate with your local Conservative councillor, who approved the whole sell off, without even reading the £1 billion contracts? Best to maintain a discreet silence, in the circumstances.

One Barnet: a love that dare not speak its name, in the run up to election 2014.

It seems an extraordinary thing for the council to refuse to re-issue lost polling cards, in view of the proven failings of the delivery system. But then this election is being overseen by a new Returning Officer, and a new Monitoring Officer, in place of the previously safe hands of Jeff Lustig, who had overseen many elections and whose experience was invaluable. 

That said, there were unforeseen difficulties that arose in the last general and local elections, even under the beady eye of the previous regime - and if there are any issues that arise this time as a result of postal failures or delays in registration, one must hope that the council is held to account. 

If any such issues are identified, presumably there will be formal complaints to the Electoral Commission, and, one would hope, an urgent investigation. 

Indeed, some might feel there should be an investigation before the election.

A great big mess: Tory run Capitaville, two weeks before the election

So: about the election campaign, Councillor Cornelius? All going to plan?

Has your pre-election handout of 23 pence a week for every taxpayer in Broken Barnet done the trick? Are grateful residents rushing up to you in the street and offering you their vote?

Any sign of a Conservative manifesto yet, by the way? No?

It's just that, you know ... people are getting their postal votes and ... it might help, if they knew, when they were making their mark on the ballot paper, what your party stands for, and what you intend to do, in the next four years, should anyone think that you and the rest of your collection of shambling fools who have sold this borough to Capita for a quick buck and a trolleyload of empty promises ought to be rewarded with another chance to shaft us all. 

Let's see. Perhaps Mrs Angry can help. No need for a manifesto, really. Look at the evidence, for example, we have seen over the last few weeks, of Barnet Conservative policy in action.

The two massive contracts with Capita, now referred to so coyly by the Barnet Tory leader as 'the change programme', is of course in fact a billion pound privatisation of every council function that wasn't nailed down in some way - the contract for the CSG services alone came to 8,000 pages, and clearly was not properly scrutinised by the elected members, some of whom have broken ranks with the Barnet tradition of omerta, when it was all too late, and admitted they were given only the most limited, token gesture of access to the agreement.

As part of the DRS/Re contract, it emerged, once a redacted version was published, that our council is contractually obliged to tell the world about the 'success' of the Capita arrangement.

Ah but, Mrs Angry, you will be asking: what if the Capita contracts are ... not a success.

This is an impossibility. The Capita contracts are an act of faith. We place our trust, not in the Lord, but in market forces, and the life of the world to come, in Capitaville. Amen. 

Anyway, we know that the contracts are a success, and saving taxpayers lots and lots of money, because our dear Leader, Richard Cornelius, has said so, and we believe him.

But how, Mrs Angry, can the dear Leader know that the contracts are a success, when they have only just got going, and there have been lots of problems, and any savings cannot be net gains as we have spent more than £80 million in nine months alone, in setting up the outsourcing programme, in order to make £160 million in savings over ten years, and the upfront capital investment of £16 million we were told by the Leader and his fellow Tories was the whole reason for the privatisation has turned out to be not an upfront capital investment at all, but money we will have to pay Capita from ... the savings we may or may not make from the deal?

Ah. 

And let us look at that evidence of the last few weeks, shall we, of how well our Tory councillors are presiding over an administration that brings savings to the taxpayer, whilst maintaining excellent standards of council services? 

An Audit committee meeting which revealed so many serious failings in the management of contracts, not just with Capita, where any issues raised are inevitably dismissed as teething problems, or due to 'historic' causes beyond their control, but with parking contractors NSL, and agency suppliers Comensura.

A school for disabled school children robbed of funding for vital respite care, and told by indifferent Tory councillors to use their reserves to make up the loss. The school is legally unable to use these reserves, and after the matter caused them too much negative publicity, the Tories were forced into a u-turn, and then tried to deflect attention from their own scabrous behaviour by smearing the Labour group which fought to restore the funding.

Yesterday it emerged that the pupils of Mapledown are not the only disabled children designated as the target for Tory cuts. Here in the Barnet Press in we learn that 'Resources for Autism' is losing desperately needed funding, and is expected to remove eight of the 40 children who attend their support schemes as a consequence. 

As Director Lisa Dresner says:

We have to lose these kids. I cannot bear it. They are asking us which children shouldn’t be coming any more, but the real answer is none of them should not be coming any more. Our children will find it very difficult to access other things.
  
Tory leader Richard Cornelius is quoted as saying this scheme, unlike Mapledown, will not be granted a 'reprieve' from his cuts. Well, after all, this is the man who thought the average person in the street would think the Mapledown cuts, in the context of the 23 pence pre-election tax hand out, was perfectly fair.

How many other children's disability charities are paying the price of this election 'gesture', approved by Tory councillors whose enthusiasm for cuts in funding did not prevent them voting themselves big fat rises in their own allowances as soon as they got into power in 2010?

As for the 'success' of the Capita contracts, the One Barnet programme - the 'change programme' ...

Here also in the Press yesterday we find another interesting story about the 'success' - or rather not - of the Capita run payroll and pensions services, which last month underpaid council employees, and in some cases paid them nothing at all, and which in February accidentally put many Barnet pensioners on the highest tax codes, in what one former teacher, a Mrs Renee Kadish, described as 'a great big mess'.

Now Mrs Angry must declare an interest here, Mrs Kadish having known her since she was a mewling baby in a pram, and indeed, Mrs Angry having spent many happy days of her childhood in the Kadish household.

Mrs Angry can confirm that Mrs Kadish is a formidable woman, and a Torygraph reading resident of many years standing, and is not the sort of person to be naturally critical of council policies. Her reaction is, in other words, a good indication of the way in which the Capitalisation of the borough is, like the disastrous parking scheme and other Tory sponsored catastrophes, already raising the political consciousness of otherwise an otherwise complacent electorate. 

And then we have the matter of Hendon Crematorium.

The previous post explained what is happening now that Capita has its grasping hands on the many revenue opportunities offered by the death and bereavement of Barnet residents. 

In yesterday's local Times we read more about the grossly disrespectful move by the company to remove memorial benches that have been sponsored by grieving relatives of those interred in the Crematorium grounds.

The excuses offered for the insensitive disposal of these benches changes with every statement from the council and the Crematorium managers. First we heard that it was necessary due to 'health and safety'. Then, as Mrs Angry reported, it emerged that the notices on many benches explain the removal is due to 'development' or 'further memorialisation'. 

Yesterday we hear they need to 'make changes to the layout' so more people can have memorials. The council tried to claim the decision to take away the benches predates Capita.

Fine: prove it. Let's see when that decision was approved by councillors, and see which of them were involved. Or was it a delegated decision agreed by the Director, Ms Pam Wharfe? Let's see the documentation.

In fact, many of Capita's grubby little plans for extracting profit from our dead relatives is clearly laid out here, in the ludicrously redacted contract - http://www.barnet.gov.uk/downloads/download/1275/schedule_37 …  read from page 163 onwards. You will note that several sections just before this page have been redacted in full - and you may like to wonder why that might be.

God knows what follows is bad enough. 

Mrs Angry draws your attention to the following example of what Capita refers to a 'Monopolistic Market Penetration Growth Idea'. 

This is a form of commercial necrophilia, in truth, in which our loved ones, and our grief, will be targeted for the profiteering pleasure of Capita's shareholders. 

In this specific case, it refers to a whizz of a scheme to corner the market on charging for flowers to be laid (where?) to commemorate your dead relatives.

Opportunity Knocks for Capita:

Making it happen:
  

As you will read, with Capita, 'sensitivity in this area is paramount' ...  but this touching concern for the bereaved appears to have been forgotten fairly soon after the ink from the Tory leader's pen dried on those contracts, as we see from the blundering disposal of the benches.

It is absolutely clear from this example that Capita intend to target bereaved families, and wean them off the most regrettable tendency to want to lay their own tributes to their loved ones, and channel them into the correct mode of behaviour, ie one that will return lots of profit to Capita. 

Whether it is flowers, or benches, or any other way in which they can interfere with the mourning of the deceased and screw some money out of it, they are likely to have a go. 

Read the rest of the proposal, and see for yourself. Capita and our Tory councillors will defend this marketing as offering a service - you may take the view that it is simply an excuse for marketing something that should never be subject to commercial exploitation - the loss of someone you love.

Well, outsourcing the dead is the logical conclusion to the Tory agenda of profit before people, just as taking vital funding from disabled children in order to pay for an election 'gesture' is, in the eyes of Richard Cornelius and his colleagues, perfectly acceptable.

No need for a Tory manifesto, Councillor Cornelius, in fact - the record of the last four years, and the evidence of our own eyes since you signed those contracts is explanation enough of what is to come, if you return to power.

This is Capitaville, and this is Broken Barnet, May 2014.

Two weeks to polling day, and a chance to wrest power from the hands of this lunatic Tory council and their profiteering friends. The consequences should we fail to remove them, and to regain control of the democratic process are plain enough to see. 

You know what to do, then, don't you?