Riverside Views

A Tory Sterling Crisis?

2009-11-11T18:36:00.005Z

I can still remember John Eatwell coming to our Labour Club in the summer of '92 to tell us how they were talking to the Treasury and BoE ahead of a possible victory in April. Of course at that time, there was a real fear of a sterling crisis when Labour got in. In 1997, sterling rallied, and got very strong, so in a way there was a Labour sterling crisis, but a crisis for manufacturers, rather than for the government.

Since March, sterling has rallied with the rest of global markets, and is still looking quite good against the dollar, even if versus the euro it is very weak. However, looking at the graph below, I wonder at what stage we'll start to say that the weakness versus the euro has followed the increasing Tory lead. I admit that may be a bit too partisan, it's all about the macro after all.

But reflect on this, markets are forward looking, so no matter what the spot forex trader thinks of the Labour government stopping him from getting a bonus, he's trading on what the government will be in the future, and the polls suggest it'll be Tory. So if sterling drops, at some stage people will start saying it's because of Tory policies. And those policies are to cut public spending sharply, and this may not be the best thing. This is discussed in the US in the context of the policy mistakes of 1937, but as Prof Reinhart discusses here, cutting spending too quickly can be bad:

It has happened before, as in her example of America in 1937. But other episodes could be added to the list, including most recently the stop-and-start performance of the Japanese economy in the 1990s and early 2000s. Declaring premature victories have been costly, both in terms of output losses and their consequences on fiscal finances.

So, there are clear distinctions in economic policy, and it is quite possible that the prospect of Tory cuts means we get a (another?) Tory sterling crisis...

091111_125929_CQG_Chart_IGBPEUR_-_Great_Britain_DM-Euro_Index_Monthly, originally uploaded by Cormac Hollingsworth.

The Internal top?

2009-11-04T22:03:00.018Z

So, in July 2007, I wondered here if we'd reached a top. All the comments about the new rich etc. And I think now we've probably reached the internal top. By that, I mean it's about 60% likely that the high last week will be the highest the stock market will be for some time. In all likelihood what will follow is a lot more anger aimed at everyone who got us into this mess. I do hope I'm wrong.

My own view is that this crash is systemic of the form of capitalism that we've had for the last 30 years: free market capitalism. I'd like to share my favourite satire of what happened. So you have something else to watch if we do collapse.

I'd also like to ask you to think about whether we need to find another form of capitalism that isn't so prone to these booms and busts. "I'm through with standing in line to a club I'll never get in, it's the bottom of the 9th and I'm never gonna win" is always the problem, but free market capitalism gave you "a credit card that's got no limit." It's not that the FSA didn't have Billy Gibbons growling "butchya gotta pay it baaaaackk". It was that if you defaulted then the banks thought they could always flip the "big black jet with a bedroom in it" to someone else ... those boys needed Billy to tell 'em you can join the "mile high club at 37,000 feet" but sometime you gotta land.

In a better form of capitalism, I'd like to ask why do we need to have a queue? And since when did our rockstars have to lipsync? :P Forming a band and enjoying the music you make is surely the source for some sort of inspiration for a different way of organising our society.

In the meantime, if it gets really scary, I'm just going to switch off the shrill shouts from the press, and kick back and listen and remember when you could buy anything, and everyone would give you credit. Nickelback are from a country with a welfare state, aren't they?

Just found this on Wikipedia: "The song was re-shipped to radio for ads on 5 June 2007, and a video was made to accompany the re-release." Now that's market timing!! Chad Kroeger's first hedge fund will be oversubscribed... you heard it hear first.

Southwark's Sheltered housing care network

2009-10-31T20:27:00.001Z

IMG00010, originally uploaded by Cormac Hollingsworth.

Support our post workers

2009-10-31T17:07:00.003Z

Southwark Trades Council supported the Postal workers picket line at the Highshore office this morning, and I went along to support them. I hadn't realised that, in London, this was their 19th day of industrial action. They were still in good spirits, being very clear that the management needs to stick by the 2007 agreement: they hadn't received any upgrade to their equipment, only cuts that threatened service delivery.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n21/letters

We've been having double deliveries and Sunday deliveries for the past three weeks. I met our postie last week, and he told me how he was facing redundancy after 30 years of service, because the management were changing his round from 500 properties to 1,000, which he justifiably described as "impossible". He said the pressure for changes from management started in March and it is getting unbearable.

I've even received texts from Tory friends saying "the union's position seems reasonable"... I have to say that the Tory attacks don't make any sense, the Post Office must cross subsidise between rural areas and us in the towns. If you didn't have a Post Office you would have to invent it.

With 19 days of action behind them, it must be getting tough for individual post workers, but they have my support

Time to crank this up

2009-10-16T22:14:00.002+01:00

It's been a while, too long. But I've been busy, happy to say we've had a baby, who's now 3 months old. Year of 2008 was terrible in the markets... And now I have a change in career direction, which means I can devote a bit more time to this blog. Did this mean I went away itrw? No, I'm now a director or trustee of 3 different Bermondsey community organisations. I kept myself busy. And now I want to chat again.

Lots of thank yous and inspiration

2007-12-14T14:49:00.000Z

It’s been a great 6 weeks as the Labour candidate in the Riverside byelection, and there are two groups of people I’d like to thank.

To the Labour voters of Riverside ward: It’s been a real privilege to meet again so many of you over the course of the last 6 weeks. Together we’ll continue to campaign for improvements in the ward. The words of encouragement and support on election day has given me a real belief that Labour can win in Bermondsey. Thanks very much for voting on a day, 2 weeks before Christmas that was bitterly cold; you showed a solid turnout.

To the Labour family: thank you so much. I feel a huge debt to the many comrades who worked so very hard; you reminded the people of Bermondsey how broad and strong the Labour movement is. Harriet Harman has been an inspiration throughout the campaign, providing continual support. Val Shawcross, Kirsty McNeill and Peter John were fabulous. The campaign team (the leaflets and the data) gave me the best campaign we could have had. It’s been a real privilege to meet so many members who’ve given their support, from Unite and Unison trade unionists, Hackney, Lambeth, Luton, Tower Hamlets, (I think there were other boroughs – please add below) London Young Labour, National Young Labour, Parliamentary group, Labour LGBT, Patrick Stewart, Mary Honeyball, and Ken Livingstone.

My fondest memory is meeting Ken: as we were posing for our photo that Val took, he quietly asked me “Are you gonna win?” I shrugged, it’s a safe Lib Dem ward, “Well,” he said with a little smile, “good luck anyway.”

And as I wish one and all a wonderful Christmas season, just remember, even Alfred Salter, one of the great first Labour MPs, won Bermondsey for Labour in the end.

Riverside By-election

2007-11-13T11:33:00.000Z

First and foremost let me say a big thank you to members from Riverside Ward for selecting me as their candidate in the up-coming by-election. The support I have received from the rest of the branch and CLP has been overwhelming. I'm really proud to have the opportunity be the Labour Party candidate in my own area.

We’ve had a really good start to the by-election in ward. The weather has been kind, allowing all our volunteers to get out and knock on thousands of doors and deliver leaflets. There’s been a great turnout by supporters over the last two weekends and from what I've seen I'm sure their dedication wont wane between now and polling day.

I’m really happy with the response on the doorstep to our campaign. The work we’ve done in the area over the last few years is having an impact. Response on the doorstep is people want to vote for a local councillor that is going to work hard for them.

What we should be saying about Northern Rock

2007-09-22T12:55:00.001+01:00

The regulatory blame game over Northern Rock is missing the point. It seems to me that depositors still have their money. Northern Rock hasn’t had to close its doors, and business has continued as usual. That is what the regulatory regime is supposed to guarantee. The regulators are supposed to protect depositors from the consequences of the decisions that each individual bank takes; decisions that are taken for the benefit of shareholders and managers with share options. It’s 150 years since the last UK bank run, and so last time there wasn’t a 24 hour media cycle, and so for me it’s the end, not the means. And, although it was a little cack-handed, the regulatory regime managed to save depositors.

What I haven’t seen is a critical analysis of what Northern Rock’s board was up to. In fact, by contrasting how the US company, Countrywide Financial, contemporaneously responded to what I shall call the money market crisis reveals a number of questions that should be posed to the management of Northern Rock. Countrywide follows a similar business model to Northern Rock – it lends mortgages to customers, then sells them on to the wholesale market in the form of securitised instruments. It faced exactly the same problem as Northern Rock during the money market crisis: a swift withdrawal of liquidity from the money markets.

Countrywide’s response began a month ago. On the 17^th August, Countrywide drew down on “bank committed facilities” to the order of £5.5bn from 40 banks. Then on 23^rd August, Countrywide secured another £1bn of deeply subordinated financing, by giving the right to buy its shares to Bank of America. Following those actions, the CEO said this week that he was “very bullish” about the future for Countrywide.

Countrywide and Northern Rock receive their financing from the same markets, so I think it’s fair to ask why Northern Rock didn’t save their bank and do the same as Countrywide. I can’t believe that similar packages of financing were not being offered to Northern Rock from the moment Investment Bankers had seen how Countrywide had got out of their squeeze.

There are further questions to ask Northern Rock, and that relates to their access to retail deposits. Of course they had taken the strategic decision for the past number of years to underweight their retail versus wholesale deposits. In my view, contrasting with most commentators I’ve read, that isn’t what got Northern Rock into a mess. Northern Rock’s lack of action to change that strategy in the last 2 months is what got Northern Rock to where it is.

Probably not many readers pay much attention to the best buy tables for retail deposits, however, since late August there has been one aggressive taker of deposits, and that was HBOS. As I highlighted here a month ago, Birmingham Midshires (a trading name of HBOS) were offering at 6.7% deposit. That week I had visited a regional building society. This building society had offered a 6.7% deposit the prior week, and it was so successful they had to close it after 1 day. The building society treasurer disclosed to me that it had raised £150m. The weekend that I posted on this blog about the Birmingham Midshires offer, I recall the Guardian’s best buy table had 1yr Birmingham Midshires, followed by the best rates in 2yrs, 3yrs, 4yrs, and 5yrs all from Halifax (another trading name of HBOS).

£150m in a day for 20 days would give us £3bn. The FT estimated this morning that Northern Rock was borrowing £3bn from the bank of England. So, between my posting of Birmingham Midshires offer and now, I think it’s arguable that Northern Rock could have taken in a large portion of its funding needs from retail deposits. Even now, Northern Rock is only offering a 6.7% bond, whereas Birmingham Midshires are now 6.95%. Northern Rock has a number of branches, as we have seen from the queues all around the country. Why couldn’t they have raised their deposit rate and taken in deposits?

I would suggest that “shareholder value” is a plausible reason why neither the wholesale equity linked strategy nor the retail borrowing response to the money market crisis were taken by Northern Rock. In isolation of the events of last week, both a wholesale Countrywide-like strategy of a large draw down of committed lines and an equity linked issue, and a high retail deposit strategy would be very negative to shareholders. Countrywide’s drawdown resulted in a 10% fall in its share price. The high retail deposits would have crushed Northern Rock’s margins, and made them need a further profits warning (they had made on in July already).

Of course, ironically, the lack of action at Northern Rock meant they had to fall into the arms of the Bank of England. And their shareholders have suffered a near total destruction of their shareholding, probably 60% below where the share price would have been if Northern Rock had followed Countrywide’s strategy.

So, the debate now should be between Northern Rock’s shareholders and its management. The government should play a part in this. Indeed, they have a right to understand why Northern Rock felt unable to follow strategies that has so far prevented its competitors from needing direct government help. We need to hear from Northern Rock’s management about why they decided it was best not to follow a path like Countrywide, or HBOS, and why they believed that not following the strategy of their peers would prevent them from the catastrophe that they have inflicted on their depositors and shareholders.

At the same time the government should more robustly defend its regulatory regime. From where I am sitting, the regulators have done their job: depositors are saved, and all the other banks (that were pro-active in seeking deposits in the last 2 months) can continue their business. Furthermore, we need to be very cautious about the regulatory regime:

Don’t change government guarantee on deposits: perhaps the British Bankers Association should clarify what collective guarantee they offer, but by the government guaranteeing deposits encourages bad banks. Once deposits are guaranteed, all deposits are at the same price, and a well run bank no longer gets the benefit of a cheaper deposit base.

Don’t change the rules on secret mergers: I disagree with the Governor on this. It is not the regulator's job to save the shareholder. In fact, to quote the Governor back to him: that would encourage moral hazard; shareholders would continue to support banks with a similar business model to Northern Rock’s, because the Governor would just shoe horn them into another clearer’s shares. Instead, the City must be regretting not offering Northern Rock a rights issue, or encouraging its board to write-off 6 month’s net interest margin to preserve the share price at 600p. That Northern Rock's share price is in fact below 200p is the best evidence that there will be no moral hazard because of this intervention.

As I’ve told my colleagues in the last few days – it’s the job of regulators to save depositors; only in films do angels get their wings by saving bank shareholders and management.

Markets, markets, markets

2007-08-22T22:13:00.001+01:00

I got phoned by a graphic designer friend of mine earlier in the week who was outraged that "sub-prime" had entered the daily-used english language. It's probably more a measure of a journalist's need to summarise, rather than a deep explanation of what's going on.

However, this story from the WSJ's Marketwatch is laughable in its analysis.

"So why would Citi, Bank of America, J.P. Morgan, and Wachovia pay a monetary penalty (on top of the possible damage to their reputation) by borrowing from the Fed? See full story.

Patriotism is one answer. The banks simply want to show support for the Fed in hopes that the smaller banks will also take advantage of the Fed's lifeline."

Ha! as if. As most people will know, banks only pay what they absolutely have to. It's one of those quotes that pop up in Chomsky-like analysis of the press and Wall Street. "Nothing's wrong, we're just being patriotic".

However, I don't want to panic anyone. Let me just provide you with evidence of how much cash there is out there. Principality Building Society offered a "best buy" 6.7% 1 year deposit bond since Friday (I think), and as you can see from their website, they've already had to close the offer. If you're still looking, then Birmingham Midshires is offering the same rate.

Now, that is still 0.05% below where other banks have been borrowing from the Bank of England this week, so that's where the price comes from, but also you can see that if a bank puts up its rate to those levels, it ships in a lot of cash. So little to worry about.

There is one thing in the back of my mind. Although it was 2 weeks ago, this Youtube clip from CNBC's Jim Cramer expresses how it's felt for the last 6 weeks, during market hours. To express Jim Cramer's fears short and snappy: do central banks still care if asset prices fall?

Ealing & Southall Betting

2007-07-18T18:02:00.001+01:00

Ealing & Southall Betting, originally uploaded by Cormac Hollingsworth.

I'm heading to Ealing tomorrow for some hours to help out. Here is the betfair probabilities on the strongest opposition. Makes quite interesting reading. (You can see a strong rally in Tories mid way through that faded). We'll see on Friday how accurate they were.

Friday pm:

Well, "wisdom of crowds" got it right this time. While I was in Ealing leafletting, I did see one of the Tory's out cards, and it had on it the Ladbrokes betting which put their candidate second. Also on the same page grab they had left the date: July 10th. Poor guys.

The Top of the Market?

2007-07-04T21:54:00.000+01:00

Those traders out there who take a contrarian view of the market will recognise where I'm going with this one.

When something makes the front cover of Time magazine, then it's normally the top of the market.

The argument goes that by the time the trade/stock/arbitrage gets onto the frontcover there are very few people left to put the trade on, and so the price can't get any further boost.

The cover on the left is coverage of private equity guru's KKR's bid for RJR Nabisco, made famous by "Barbarians at the Gate" in print and film format.

Of course, RJR was the largest Private Equity buyout of its time and in the end only generated an IRR of 1%.

And it pretty much marked the top of the market, Drexel Burnham Lambert blew up and we headed into the early recession of the 1989/1990's.

This front page is from December 1988, 15 months after the 1987 stock market crash.

We haven't had a crash so far in this bull run, so Private Equity may still have quite some time to run - unless they make it to the front page of Time following the Blackstone IPO and now KKR is doing one too.

On a different but related note, the front page of Newsweek was of interest to me this week: cataloguing the way the super rich spend their money.

I hope this does mark the top on this. I think there are good reasons to suspect so. The divergence between the wealthy and the rest of us has, in my view, been largely due to the very low interest rates of the last 6 years. Essentially, the rich have been able to invest in Private Equity, or Hedge funds, who have been able to borrow huge amounts at very low rates and buy lots of assets, driving those asset prices up. Of course rates are a lot higher now.

Why isn't Eliza Mann Mayor?

2007-07-03T13:03:00.000+01:00

Walking back from the Four Squares last night with Cllr Mann, I was talking to her about why she hadn’t got to be Mayor. She mentioned it was to do with the Sri Lankan High Comission complaining, which adds a little mystery but didn’t seem to me all that satisfactory, particulary when you consider who she was replaced with. I say “replaced” because she was last year’s deputy Mayor (deputy Mayor was OK for the Sri Lankan gov’t last year), and so in the normal course of things she would then have been made Mayor.

In fact, at the time the dual appointment of Paul Kyriacou and Cllr Mann as Mayor and Deputy Mayor made perfect sense to me. They both had worked in the 2006 elections. Rarely found campaigning in their own wards, they were always to be found south of the Old Kent Rd fighting for a Lib Dem victory. As a result, their own majorities in their respective wards were halved.

Of course I did see Bob Skelly just as frequently during the campaign, while he was leafleting around Bermondsey street, shoring up his majority:

	2002 Majority	2006 Majority
Paul Kyriacou	724	468 (-35%)
Eliza Mann	722	375 (-48%)
Bob Skelly	440	474 (+7%)

In my view, Cllr Mann can be forgiven for feeling a little put out by how she was elbowed out of the way. After all she has received a lot of support from Simon Hughes for her campaigning for Tamils. Simon is often mentioned as speaking in support of Cllr Mann’s charities:

“The main front runner of the organisation of the rally is Madame Cllr Elizabeth Packiyadevi Mann. She is a Lib-Dem Councillor of London Borough of Southwark and Simon Hughes is one of the constituent Member of Parliament of the Borough ... It is expected Simon Hughes MP will be addressing the gathering at Trafalgar Square after the procession.” MOD Sri Lanka 11/7/06

How is it that Simon can be such a regular supporter of her campaigning for her community that those same campaigns mean that the same local Lib Dems won’t make her Mayor?

Plenty have lined up to say it’s OK for Bob to (eventually) apologise for his “racist” remarks. But it says a lot about the group think in liberal media in Southwark that no-one thinks there are any child protection issues here at all. In particular, Andy should know better. His presence on the same slate as Karl Lindon, (and that he was duped into defending Karl’s internet business), should have given Andy more sense and definitely more sensitivity to child protection issues.

But it saddens me that, as Andy has commented, there are plenty of BAME Lib Dem members – couldn’t we have had one of them to replace Eliza? So I have a lot of sympathy with Cllr Mann that not only has her hard work not been rewarded, but she got elbowed out of the way for Bob Skelly.

Alfred Salter’s successor, the next MP for Bermondsey

2007-07-01T19:12:00.001+01:00

Alfred Salter’s successor, the next MP for Bermondsey, originally uploaded by Cormac Hollingsworth.

Kirsty McNeill this morning won the selection to be the Labour party’s candidate for the constituency of Bermondsey & Old Southwark.

New Tory GLA Candidate finds Rotherhithe on Mars

2007-06-13T12:34:00.000+01:00

The Tory candidate for Southwark and Lambeth GLA is already up and running. Here's her first post:

Shirley Houghton said, “Rotherhithe passengers already face two years of bus travel to get to their nearest tube station while the East London Line undergoes extension works.”

Imagine if you hit the emergency button on one of them buses - £50 fine and an 18 month wait.

Shortlisted Candidates Bermondsey PPC 2007

2007-06-11T10:25:00.001+01:00

Shortlisted Candidates Bermondsey 2007, originally uploaded by Cormac Hollingsworth.

In Bermondsey we're in the process of selecting our prospective parliamentary candidate, and, we believe, the Bermondsey's next Labour MP. Yesterday afternoon, the CLP General Committee met to draw up the short list for the Hustings, and the three succesful candidates are pictured above.

The three candidates are (in alphabetical order), Ayesha Chowdhury (a councillor in Newham), Kirsty McNeill (a councillor in Southwark), and Munaf Zina (a 2006 Hackney Council candidate, pictured in the middle).

The Hustings will take place on 1st July. Eligible Members will be sent notices in the near future.

Footnote - this is why I've been a little lax in postings, been quite busy being the procedures secretary, organising this.

Pidgeon’s Success to lead to Reshuffle?

2007-06-10T21:55:00.000+01:00

Congratulations to local Lib Dem councilor Caroline Pidgeon, who has won a number of nominations recently. She's now the London Lib Dem candidate for the GLA, and also Vauxhall’s Lib Dem Parliamentary candidate.

She’s set up a couple of websites, helpfully using the same background design, http://www.caroline4london.org.uk/, and http://www.caroline4vauxhall.org.uk/. However she doesn’t appear to be “4newington” or “4southwark” because those two websites aren’t up and running, even though she didn’t spend much time changing the format of the other two. But maybe she’s moving on. Given that she’s 3rd on the Lib Dem list, and the Lib Dems currently have 5 London wide Assembly Members, there’s a good chance she’ll get there.

Right now, Caroline is still Executive member for Education in Southwark, as well as being Councillor in Newington, and Deputy Leader of Southwark Lib Dems. The last time Caroline was selected as a candidate for the London Assembly, she did the right thing and resigned from the Executive. Lets hope she does the right thing this time as well.

My concern here is that her numerous blogs don’t show her to be doing much in the way of “doing her job” for which she is being paid quite well. In my view, she is supposed to be improving education in Southwark. Nobody can seriously say that Caroline can do a good job while campaigning across London. Being a GLA candidate is pretty much a full-time job. In the video posted on her website, and reproduced here, she commits herself to getting Lib Dem councilors across the Greater London Area!

It’s not as if Caroline is a backbench councilor, or even an opposition spokesperson. In both cases she would be pushed to make sure she kept up with her case work, but it would probably be do-able. Being an opposition spokesperson might impose additional workload, but it’s just being a spokesperson – you’re trying to keep your opposite number on their toes.

Instead, Caroline remains our Education Czar. I doubt that this can last very long, education in Southwark is a crucial job that deserves time and dedication. Especially at the a time when primary schools in our area go into special measures.

So that's why we can expect a reshuffle to come quite quickly.

Recognise Anybody at the NF March?

2007-06-10T18:03:00.001+01:00

I doubt any of these are locals, but in case they are, might recognise someone. A number of local Labour party members leafletted the route of the march a week before with an excellent leaflet entitled "Hope not Hate" that we got from Searchlight

Google Red

2007-03-07T21:34:00.000Z

I don't use Google Ad Sense on this website, because I guess I don't flatter myself about the readership, but also I don't really want to put them on here.

However...

If Google had an option on their Ad Sense page so that I could donate my gains to (RED), that would prompt me to put the adverts on here.

It would be a cool extension of this rather clever branding to the internet. They could call it Google(Red).

Of course it would condemn us to Google Ads on every website, but might also ensure that Bono didn't have to wait any longer for someone to buy a Jumbo Jet on a (Red)Amex.

The Grass isn't Greener

2007-03-05T20:59:00.000Z

Imagine turning up to a Tenants meeting, where before the Secretary of the TRA has walked into the meeting, he has to run back up to his flat to fend off a gang of thugs trying to kick-in his door...

I've just returned from a Four Squares TRA meeting which started in that fashion.

Val Shawcross was invited to speak at the meeting so that she could inform the TRA about the process of getting a Dispersal order on the estate. The last month has seen the Secretary of the TRA systematically targetted by a gang of 30 youths rampaging round the estate. The same youths who targetted his flat this evening as he was making his way down to the TRA meeting.

As the TRA meeting is not well attended (think about it: would you leave your flat if 30 kids were going to kick in the door?), so the TRA asked Val to do a survey of the residents of the estate to see if there was support for a dispersal order. Hopefully that will encourage the Police to actually put a dispersal order on the estate. The last two Augusts this estate has been a war zone. The dispersal order should really cover both the Four Squares and the Kirby, as they are having similar problems.

So, there, my first post in 3 months on this blog, and I've done it to answer the few regular readers, who have asked me why did I stop. Well, I've asked them what is the point? It's like a broken record, Anti Social Behaviour this, broken doors that. No-one cares. Don't believe that Southwark Council don't look at this site, other bloggers in the area have told me what the name of their ISP is, so you can tell. But NOTHING GETS DONE. One of the people whom I'm really glad since I've met since I've ventured into local politics said "the thing is, Cormac, after a while even I begin to think 'it's really boring to be going on about the same problems time after time'".

Back to the attendance at the TRA: the councillors, MP and SASBU and the Wardens all know that the Secretary has been a target for malicious attacks because he's speaking up for his estate, and do any of them even bother to turn up to the TRA meeting to give him their support, stand with him? Do they heck! Just the local Police Safer Neighbourhood team, and it's a good job they turned up so that they could see once again the Secretary's flat get attacked.

It is a complete disgrace.

Labour Friends of Searchlight

2006-11-12T17:56:00.000Z

Superb day in Birmingham yesterday at Amicus and Searchlight supported "Fight the BNP and rebuild the Labour Party" dayschool. Two Bermondsey members went to it. 135 people attended from almost 75 CLPs. Searchlight have published a briefing pack which dealt with all the workshop topics: Identifying and turning out the anti-BNP vote (18% of the electorate according to the meeting); Using community campaigning to beat the BNP (trade unions, and churches provide a lot of leafletters); Dealing with BNP Councillors (throw the statute book at them - under the Amendment to the 2000 Race Relations Act, local authorities have an obligation to eliminate unlawful racial discrimination and promote equality of opportunity); Involving Trade unions; Dealing with difficult issues; Getting your message across.

There were some real horror stories of safe Labour parliamentary seats with only 160 members, constituencies where they hadn't door knocked for years, where they might deliver a leaflet before an election, but then not over the whole constituency. At the same time, there were stories of the invigoration that fighting the BNP can have on a CLP, and the campaigning spirit that can be generated.

In broad terms, I thought our CLP was probably further up the learning curve in terms of campaigning, but some way back in terms of contact with the broader community, and definitely way behind in contacts with Trade Unions.

But really the meeting boiled down to: get out and knock on doors!

There was an undertone of disappointment with the national Labour Party. That was until a comrade from an MPs office stood up and told the meeting that the local parties and councillors should look to themselves: the parliamentary party has done huge things for each members community for the past 10 years, but what had those members and councillors done to just even publicise those successes. A sobering scolding that had a lot of truth to it.

Topical Quiz

2006-11-09T22:19:00.000Z

1. The Council Leader says about his job “I don’t know what I’d do if I didn’t do this.”
You tell him:
(a) “No, nor do I”
(b) “I’m sure you were a wonderful barrister”
(c) “No, I don’t know either – and I am so glad you plan to stand as Leader again in May. I don’t understand all those people who keep briefing against you.”

2. The Council Leader tells you “Everyone seems very cheerful – no-one is briefing against me.”
You tell him:
(a) “I used to be a member of the Labour Party”
(b) “Of course not, heaven forfend, I’d never brief against you but do the names Zuleta, Thomas and Pidgeon mean anything to you?”
(c) “Of course not. Good heavens, the lies people say to journalists these days.”

3. The Council Leader says in a newspaper interview that “The group voted totally unanimously to go into joint administration with the Conservatives”. You mutter (in the secret of your home):
(a) “The man’s a liar and a fool – think of how that will play on every Labour Rose for the next four years.”
(b) “Absolutely - anything to keep us in power.”
(c) “Well, I suppose he’s right in a way. Words like “unanimous” can be awfully misleading.”

4. The Council Leader says his job is so wonderful that he “certainly wouldn’t trade it in for being an MP”. You mutter (again out of earshot of all bar your cat):
(a) “Who the hell would select him anyway?”
(b) “A dig at Pidgeon and Thomas no doubt”
(c) “Nick always puts the needs of the local community above his own ambitions. I can’t understand why the Tooley St campaigners were so nasty to him.”

5. A local newspaper takes the unusual step of naming and shaming 5 of your Lib Dem councillor colleagues for “wanting to put their support for the Leader on record”. You think:
(a) “They only did it because they have personal agendas or are totally stupid”
(b) “They only did it because they have personal agendas or are totally stupid”
(c) “It is nice that Lib Dem councillors are so loyal to the Leader. When I learn how to dial phone numbers for myself, I will also phone up journalists and say things like that.”

6. The Deputy Leader of the Council (NB: important background information for Lib Dem Cllrs who have not worked this out for themselves – The Deputy Leader is not a Lib Dem; he is a Tory) says of the decision to effectively abolish the Housing Department, “It is time for politicians to stop complaining and to let council managers get on with managing the service.” The Leader asks you what you think about this. You say:
(a) “We should never have given the Tories Housing and Resources”
(b) “We are all totally united on the need to be in a joint administration, Leader but don’t you think that there will always be practical problems in working with Tories?”
(c)“I agree. I hate all politicians except for Simon Hughes who sends me birthday cards and told me I should stand for the Council.”

Which type of Southwark Lib Dem Councillor are you?

- Mainly a’s: Critical when you feel like it and at times falling out of love with Southwark Lib Dems; speak softly or you could be viewed as a Premier League defector. To check if you’re in this category – read (Night)Mayer's blog and see if he’s omitted to mention you and your achievements for local Liberalism.
- Mainly b’s: Superficially supportive with an obsequious side. To check if you’re in this category – Was Yes, Minister one of your favourite TV programmes? When life as a Southwark Lib Dem councilor gets too much, do you like to come home from Council and Lib Dem meetings to watch repeat episodes on your DVD?
- Mainly c’s: You are the solid gold heart of Southwark Liberal Democrats. It is because of the work of people like you that the Lib Dems have been winning seats in Southwark for 25 years. Careful though, the Lib Dems also lose the odd seat in Southwark these days so it is sometimes good to think about things a little more. To check if you’re in this category – do you honestly, truthfully, when no-one is listening think that Nick Stanton is a good leader of the Council and that the current administration is doing a better job than anyone else could possibly do? If you do, you probably are.

I received this on email, and thought it deserved broader publication ... composed by my good comrade J.

Meeting Max, Cable Street to Communist Councillor

2006-10-18T21:58:00.000+01:00

Max Levitas was at the Battle of Cable Street.

Max also happened to wander into the Oona King's Campaign HQ at the same time that 20 people from Bermondsey CLP were there on Bank Holiday last year. So, as these things go, myself and Richard Livingstone set off with Max to knock-up the list that we were given. On that warm afternoon, Max shared with us his experience of being a a Communist Councillor in St Katherines dock after the war, and proved to be about as un-GOTV as you could hope to get. Myself and Richard whipped round blocks while Max engaged with the electorate. He amiably lectured myself and Richard about how we couldn't just rely on people's votes, but actually had to connect with their concerns.

You can google Max's name, but here's some things I found, what a wonderful chap (the last link you'll find him mentioned on comment 48)

Is he living proof that antifascism is good for your health?

Chastened Partisan

2006-09-30T17:00:00.000+01:00

Last month I headed down to Catford, to attend a LARAG meeting. My email address had been punted down to them via my contact with UAF because, I presume, there is no active branch in our borough.

I returned from their meeting with their welcome promise of support should Southwark residents decide to form a UAF branch. I believe we need a branch in Southwark, because race has become heatedly politicised, unacceptably so. In Lewisham, all the main parties commit to LARAG's code ahead of every election. For me, the evidence is there for the benefits: Lewisham LibDems bankrupted the local BNP organiser. Furthermore, all those who don't want to see the BNP in the GLA need to organise in Southwark, we had one ward in 2004 which voted 10% for the BNP. We need to organise now to get out the vote to neutralise them.

We desperately need a broad based community action on race in Southwark. Since Southwark council has been branded as being dominated by a "white hierarchy", Lord Ouseley commented:

The council could resolve most of these matters instantly if the political will were there. One Lib-Dem councillor, Jonathan Hunt, has been suspended from the group for the heinous crime of siding with those victims of the system who dare to complain of racial discrimination.

The imperial gardens case continues to run, blighting and poisoning the politics in Southwark. I have my own experiences of this: when a senior LibDem comments in chambers that he "could not understand half of what you said" to a Welsh Labour member, am I to understand from that, that he doesn't like her accent? And in the local LibDem election leaflets, when the LibDems attacked Labour on tax, the LibDem case for a Labour tax increase was based on Labour's spending promises. Top of the list was "£9m for Imperial Gardens"...

I actually think we need some help from the unions here. I'd like to hear some more from Southwark Trades Council on this area. The unions are crucial in UAF, and I hope they provide a lead in Southwark.

But let's also be honest as a local party, the Labour party shoulders a portion of the blame for this "white hierarchy".

It might be hard to believe (for those of you who haven't met Bermondsey people), but in 1937, 15,000 stopped the British Union of Fascists marching to Southwark Park, described here by an eyewitness who was on Long Lane. (The citation here of "Bermondsey Says No to Fascism: United Against Mosley. London: Bermondsey Trade Council, 1937." - will Southwark Trades Council sponsor a 70th Anniversary publication?) But I guess not many people also know that Bermondsey was, together with Bethnal Green, a no-go area during the 1926 General Strike, unless you've read the 1976 publication by Southwark Trades Council on "Nine Days in May" which is reprinted by some London anarchist group.

So what happened? Well, Bermondsey Labour was doing "sons and daughter" housing policy in the 1960's, long before anyone in Tower Hamlets could spell LibDem, as a searchlight article comments:

Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, successive Labour councils practised a “sons and daughters” housing policy, giving flats to young people near their families. This effectively excluded anyone from even a couple of miles outside their area, never mind people of Afro or Asian origin. Many local people had worked for generations in the Surrey Docks, where jobs were handed down from father to son. Their closure left a huge gap in local employment. Because of these factors many of the residents on these estates form a very tight knit community, which has excluded and feared all outsiders.

All while we had a Labour MP in the form of Bob Mellish. A Labour MP who made his position clear in 1976. Looking back, Mellish seems unhealthily prominent in the anti-immigration debate of the 1970's. In this comment from the Political Quarterly, October 1976, "Westminster Scene" by John Bevan:

The immigration problem is harder for Labour, since it involves the moral problem of multi-racialism with which the Conservatives are less preoccupied. But Labour also is split; the fierce warning given by the former Chief Whip, Bob Mellish, that “Enough is enough ” indicated the deep divisions within the Labour Party, and the fact that Mr. Mellish, working class himself and representing Bermondsey, as working class a constituency as is to be found anywhere, must have aroused the greatest misgivings. It is not as if the Jenkins policy has been in any way soft : sternly he has declared that it is limited to the admission of dependants of those already settled in Britain, and to Asian United Kingdom passport holders living in Africa, though these, if they are not overtly subject to persecution in their countries of origin, are strictly restricted by quota.

My own view is that Mellish and the Bermondsey mafia holds much of the blame. What could possibly have been Bob's motivation? Bermondsey had shown itself to be an area of radicalism and progressive politics between the wars. In Peter Tatchell's introduction in his Battle of Bermondsey memior, there is a story of Mellish's comment at the 1946 selection that he, Bob Mellish, "was exactly like the dockers" that were selecting him (the dockers comment reported by Tatchell exhibits a typical Bermondsey spirit). To me, Peter Tatchell chose that story to show the type of politician he believed Bob Mellish was: self-seeking politics based on favours and to contrast him unfavourably to Alfred Salter, and Alfred Salter's radical Bermondsey (read Fenner Brockway's Bermondsey Story). I doubt Alfred Salter ever pretended he was exactly like the dockers

For the last 23 years, of course, Bermondsey has had a different party as its main party of power. However, who else was Simon Hughes to partially gain his pool of supporters from, but some of those pre-1983 Labour party members/supporters? It's down to a LibDem blogger to write about the post 1983 politics. In my view, the local Labour party has been punished with electoral disaster because of its mistakes.

Lewisham's example suggests the best way of a post-Ouseley report community action. We desperately need it. This is too serious an issue to be left to partisan politicians.

Four Squares Update

2006-09-26T11:54:00.000+01:00

A prolonged email exchange with Bermondsey Housing Office, the result of which, tomorrow Southwark officers will be going down to Lockwood Sq to undertake a major exercise in clearing all rubbish from the Lockwood Sq garages, and also organising proper securing of the garages. The Housing Office have promised to use "high security grilling" which is fixed in to the brickwork and promises to be more robust

Apparently, they can't fix Lockwood Sq garages because they are moving the cars from Lockwood to New Place. The completion date for phase 1 of the major works on New Place is November 2006, and the completion date for phase 2 is June 2007.

I hope after Tory conference next week, Cllr Humphrey's will be able to deliver on his promise of an action team.

Going round in circles on the Four Squares

2006-09-12T18:12:00.000+01:00

Sheila Fairfield is angry. Sheila, the chair of Four Squares TRA , is also fed up.

Attending the Four Squares TRA meeting in August were Simon Hughes, MP, Cllr Kim Humphreys (Tory) Executive member for Housing, and Cllrs Eliza Mann and Paul Baichoo, along with THIRTEEN Southwark Council Officers. At that meeting, and as reported by Soutwark News, Cllr Humphreys announced setting up a new Task Force specifically for the Four Squares.

Since leaving the TRA meeting hall on Drummond Rd that balmy Monday evening in August, however, not only has nothing happened, but not one person who promised at that meeting to contact the TRA has picked up the phone: Simon “I’ll call you in the week …” Kim: “I’ll contact you on this issue” … At the September meeting just passedno-one from the Housing Office bothered to turn up, nor could any of the local Cllrs make it.

Sheila Fairfield told the meeting last Monday, that now, she was angry.

The Four Squares TRA has fought tirelessly for its community, setting up a website to highlight their campaign (their plight caught the attention of a national paper last week) and they have taken their problems all the way to the council chamber. When they spoke to Southwark Council in March this year about all the problems on their estate and how the council seemed unable to help them, you could have heard a pin drop in the chamber.

Back then I don’t remember Sheila being angry.

Since then, the LibDem councillors made some election promises about improving the conditions on the estate, and Kim Humphreys descended on the estate with almost the same panache we’ve come to expect from Simon. This TRA is no longer in any mood to hear promises, they want to see action.

As I was on holiday at the beginning of August, once I was back, I thought I’d give a look around the estate to see what Kim Humphrey’s new crack team had achieved.

There were two main commitments made to the TRA in the March and April period. First, the Area Housing Officer had promised to cordon off the garages under one of the squares that was attracting a lot of ASB. Second the LibDems promised the estate new security doors, beginning on New Place Square, starting at the end of May. It being the August bank holiday weekend, I was expecting much of this to be solved.

Jane Martin, Bermondsey Area Housing Officer told the Bermondsey Community Council Meeting February 1st that

The Lockwood garages will be secured to prevent vacant garages being used for drug taking, criminal activity or arson. Residents renting garages for parking will be offered alternative garages elsewhere, which will be grouped together for greater security.

Going under the square into the Lockwood garages on the Sunday afternoon, the first thing I could smell was burning, and I found the garages recently vandalised. There was definitely no evidence for any form of intervention by the council.

Moving up to New Place Square rather than finding security doors, in 3 months, all that Southwark Council had managed to do was the preparatory work. One of the LibDem councillors lives in New Place Square … it amazes me that he has spent the last 3 months walking past this bomb site and it hasn’t made him pick up the phone and get something done about it.

Even though having to walk through a building site for 3 months is completely unacceptable, I was very concerned by the arson in Lockwood Square, and walking round the rest of the estate, I found at least one of the bin storage areas was unlocked.

There has been a lot of work done to reduce arson on this estate, as Val Shawcross highlighted when she visited the TRA this spring. These bin areas were a key target by the arsonists, and I was concerned to see a broken lock on one of the doors.

A week later, when I was coming back from the September TRA meeting last Monday, nothing had been done about the door lock, and so I emailed the Jane Martin. I was down at the Four Squares again last night, seeing Bill and Barbara, and the lock had still not been repaired… I still haven't heard back from Bermondsey Area Housing Office. In that email I also highlighted the problems I have here, and also some others that you can see on my flickr website (it's depressing, so don't bother).

Bless him, though, Paul did ask a question at Council Assembly. With the Tories having the Housing portfolio, perhaps this is all that this councillor can now do.

If you want a sense of what a TRA meeting at the Four Squares is like, then look at the TRA’s own website “Hall of Shame”. You get a feel for how relentlessly similar each TRA meeting is at the Four Squares: the TRA reads last months minutes, the Housing Officer, if she turns up shrugs, and then a few more things are added to the list for next month’s minutes.

Simon or Kim should worry about Sheila now being angry; worry at the consequences if Cllr Kim Humphrey’s “honest broker” promise is empty. That's because that worse than not having their porblems dealt with, this community has repeatedly been let down on previous promises to do something. And those promises involved large sums of money.

This community was promised investment in December 2003.

Then the investment was promised again in April 2004.

Nothing happened. The TRA then started to take their complaints to the Community Council. In July last year, the council promised

New security door entry systems will be installed in Four Squares–
Lockwood Square and New Place in October and November, with Marden and Layard
Square to follow.

Nothing happened, so they went to the Scrutiny committee in November last year, where Cllr Kim Humphreys, then chair of Scrutiny, heard first hand the problems that they were suffering. The Council repeated the same promise. So, unfortunately for Cllr Humphreys, this isn’t the first time he’s had the problems on this estate clearly presented.

Still nothing happened, and in desperation, the TRA went to the council chambers, to give a deputation.

At that time, the LibDem/Tory alliance (not yet a coalition) voted to defeat a Labour motion calling for immediate action, and the LibDems and Tories instead voted in a rubber stamp of the promises that had repeatedly made.

As is standard procedure, the officers reported to the executive in June this year what was being done (!) following the LibDem/Tory motion passed in March. More than anything else, what should worry Kim Humphreys most, is that it is clear from this report that the TAZ has been working on it … I mean, the TAZ is that cross agency team he’s promised the Four Squares, but it’s been "working" on the Four Squares since at least October 2005… But maybe they don’t have TAZ’s in College Ward.

Woken once more by Browns Restaurant

2006-09-09T08:46:00.000+01:00

Completely ignoring the contact from the Noise team last week, Browns once more collected their rubbish before 9am. This time the bin men regailed us with a crushing of their rubbish before collecting the bins from Browns. I'm fuming. Of course I have contacted Tony in the noise team once more.

Means and Ends

2006-09-06T14:59:00.000+01:00

"One hundred years in existence, 22 in power. We have never ever won a full second term. That is our unfinished business. Let us now finish it and with it finish the Tory party's chances of doing as much damage in the next century as they've done in this one."

from his 1999 Conference Speech

Graffiti opposite Vinopolis

2006-09-04T22:45:00.000+01:00

I took this at the end of July. It is where there used to be a more attractive Banksy graffiti, until Southwark painted over it. Of course, Southwark can't be *rsed to paint over this one.

But what has slightly tickled me is that I have seen the same thing in the Bellenden conservation area, and also here, in Camden market (again taken in late July):

Obviously I prefer Banksy, but am clueless as to what "it all means" ... this tag, not Banksy.

Noise Team stops noise

2006-09-04T14:21:00.000+01:00

Although it says in All Bar One's License that they can collect rubbish only after 9am, it's taken me taking photos at 8am on a Saturday morning to prove to Southwark's noise team that the rubbish was coming from there.

With that proof, the noise team have just told me that they've contacted the contractor (of course it was their fault!) and told them not to turn up until 9am. So a little bit more or a lie-in for Shad Thames, well done chaps.

An eye on Potter's Field

2006-09-01T15:34:00.000+01:00

WiFi in Southwark would be quite nice

2006-08-29T19:32:00.000+01:00

WiFi across Southwark would cool! Westminster is already planning to build out WiFi capability embedded in an efficiency drive. Now with Google announcing almost 2 weeks ago that it would provide free WiFi to its home town, isn't it time that some A-list Tory/prospective LibDem parliamentary candidate jumped on the band wagon and suggested the same for Southwark? ... come on chaps, don't be shy (your speech is then written: moan about how much the Labour gov't took from companies for all those 3G licenses).

South London Press name Southwark asbos

2006-08-25T17:15:00.000+01:00

Quite unexpected, but following on from the long-running refusal of Tory-Liberal Southwark council refusal to name ASBOs... the South London Press has decided to name the ASBOs in last week's story.

Having read Southwark News' report last week of a council policy "ASBO U-turn" this comes as quite a surprise. Southwark News seems to believe that the council have changed their policy. The residents on the East Dulwich estate and the SLP must have come to a different view.

Southwark Labour push the Tory-Liberals to name ASBOs

2006-08-19T18:52:00.000+01:00

Once again, we have a Southwark estate plagued by asb, and the community asking to know who has ASBOs. Peter is the local councillor for that estate. This has re-ignited the argument over the LibDem policy of complete ban on naming ASBOs. There is an online petition. Peter's policy comments highlight our view:

The phrase 'name and shame' throws up all sorts of negative connotations about
stigmatising young people, but what it really means is identifying to the local
community the names of those who are subject to ASBOs and what the terms of
their ASBOs are. Each ASBO is different - and is aimed at tackling the the
particular behaviour or problems which the recipient has been causing. In order
to effectively enforce any ASBO I believe that the community has to know what
the terms of the orders are - so that they can act as the eyes and ears for the
authorities who ultimately should be enforcing the orders. Home Office
guidance and the Courts support identification of those subject to
ASBOs.

This echoes the problems on an estate up here in Bermondsey. In my experience, the demand for naming those with ASBOs partly marks a break down in the trust the community has for how the council is dealing with the problem. Nevertheless, a community deserves to know!

Safer Southwark? The good and the sad

2006-08-19T17:50:00.000+01:00

Here's an excellent example of safer neighbourhood team getting involved: well done PC Thorpe! informing the local community about what they're up to.

Of course, if you wanted to find out how safe we were, and were asking: are Mayor Ken's new safer neighbourhood teams improving things; you, like me, would go straight to the safer southwark parternship's beacon council 2004-2005 website, and get a download.

ah well, I'm sure since early December 2005, the whole of the ssp website team has been redirected to catching crims... unfortunately we'll have to wait a while until we find out how many bods they've nicked!

Beach at Tower Bridge

2006-08-19T16:57:00.000+01:00

It's been pretty well flagged by Southwark News, but I got an email from Terry about this, and just in case ... There is a license application in for a "beach", read: lots of sand, in Potters Field coach park. Objections must be in by 25th August. The timing on stopping entertainment is as follows:

Open until midnight
stop showing films at 23.30
stop live music and/or dancing at 20.30
sale of alcohol on premises 23.00
sale of alcohol off premises 23.00

Those who saw what happened when they had the football show might have an opinion on this.

Although I'm not sure why they need to sell alcohol off premises, I'd be very interested to know what Southwark Council think of this. They own the land, and it is also right next to the Potters Field park, where there is Â£3million being spent. I assume that's where the off-premises license alcohol is going to be consumed ... nice joined up thinking there.

I was told by a long-time resident that the beach at Tower Bridge used be under the Tower of London, and the Beefeaters used be the lifeguards. On our side of the river, there recently has been a number of plans to have a beach round by Potters Field. This didn't fly here and here.

Finally, this search has been enabled by Southwark's new license search engine: you can do it by ward/street. Very good licensing department - well done. Those in Shad Thames who look up Riverside ward will see that there is an application for an off-license.

Rubbish in the early morning

2006-08-19T16:56:00.000+01:00

I've been on hols, was a good break, back to Autumnal weather. Back also to a noisy early Saturday morning as some bar gets its empties collected at 8am on a Saturday morning. I pointed this out to the noise team, at the end of July on email, and they came back to me on the following Thursday having investigated the complaint. It's quick easy, and every asb/licensing meeting I've been to, the noise team has always said "no-one complained about that"... so no-one must be using this easy to use email notification - don't bother to phone them by the way ...

There is a follow up - the noise team reported to me that Browns denied it was them - it was the Blue Print cafe instead. Well, this morning, I saw the bins coming from under Tea Trade Wharf ... I couldn't get the photo done in time, because there were only two bins worth done - it was a quiet Friday night. Next Saturday is a bank holiday, so there might be enough time to get down there and take some photos.

Make a LibDem PAY! - light entertainment for late afternoon

2006-07-28T12:59:00.000+01:00

I feel that the politics in Southwark has been at a higher pitch since the local elections. I think one of the reasons for this is a result of the ruthless targetting of wards, by both Labour and Liberals. This meant that we focussed on where we could win. Now, as this unwinds, that campaigning experience is being applied across the borough.

Anyway it's Friday, and I'll put you to sleep if I don't cut to the chase: One of the consequences of not having to spend every waking hour in a particular ward is that a number of activists have set up blogs, and I think it's worthwhile to review the opposition now (albeit they run the council).

First up, and the point of this posting, is a blogger who was a LibDem candidate in a Walworth ward, and managed to increase Labour's majority in that ward from 70 to 770 (you didn't misread that). His morale untouched by what many would consider a bitter defeat, this blogger has gone on to write postings on most of the Labour activists in the borough. Recently, so keen is he to ensure that his blog is read, he has employed Google's advertising to guide innocent surfers into his lair. And not only does he advertise with his name, but also practically everyone else's name that he's featured so far on his blog.

So if you're bored, and fancy some fun, just click on the link here, and make small contributions from his credit card. "Do No Evil" does not preclude some mischief. I suggest spending your afternoon clicking on the advert, press backpage, click on advert, press backpage ... The link is here.

The other blog/website is a spanking, cracking one from Cllr Paul Baichoo, one of the LibDems who defeated us here in Riverside. I've, so far, not commented about him because he's a new councillor and a guy needs a chance to find his feet and get in the saddle. His personal story on his blog, which didn't come out in the election campaign [source: no relentless targettting in this ward], is worth reading. Also, from what I've seen of him he has that edge of fresh LibDem keen-ness that many of his other LibDem colleagues lack: when he arrived at a Four Squares TRA meeting I was at recently, Paul bounded into the room 5 minutes from the end (not good), spoke about helping organise some walkabouts (good), and said something along the lines of - look, I can understand that you don't trust me yet, but I'm here to help you, and I'll work hard for you (very good).

Anyway, poor Paul has been in a bit of a bother about a reported "hug a thug" comment featured in the local press last week. Possible source: the TRA meeting I saw him at was the first one he had been at since the Four Squares problems have been highlighted over a year ago, even though he lives on the estate. So misjudging the feeling on the estate was always possible.

But he's almost taking it on the chin, and I think it's important that this is publicised. However, those who are still worried for his safety after will be comforted by this press release from Croydon council with a comment from Paul from January this year: if things start to get really sticky, he can always go on one of those long cruises.

That would of course leave us with just Nick to look after us...

Nick Stanton can't apologise, so he should just shut up

2006-07-27T17:53:00.000+01:00

(1) Despite what the Stanton claims here , and here (a claim supported by our MP Simon Hughes), this is the advice from the DCMS on "Making Representations":

If you want to ask another person, such as an MP or local Councillor to represent you, it is advisable to make such a request in writing so that the individual can demonstrate he or she was asked. It will be a matter for the MP or Councillor to decide whether they should agree to your request. They are not obliged to do so, however, most elected representatives are happy to help residents with this sort of issue, and there is no requirement for them to live in the vicinity of the premises in question for them to be able to make representations on behalf of residents that do. Councillors who are part of the licensing committee hearing the application will not be able to enter into discussions with you about the application, outside of the formal hearing, so it is suggested that you do not approach them to try to.

(2)Now, Stanton (worryingly sounding like Rembrandt's barrister at the appeal hearing) is saying "the police didn't object". It is true that they didn't comment on Rembrandt's, but there has been a lot of learning from mistakes, and I've heard that the police weren't too happy with the fact that because they didn't say anything, the court understands that as "no objections". Now the police do comment on Lapdancing clubs, such as the refusal of the Newham license where police submitted a that I have already featured.

I would also add that this lack of police comment is probably now seen as one of the initial failings of the new licensing law. How it's been explained to me is that under the previous law the police had to comment, they didn't under the new, so they just didn't. They've now realised that they should, and hence they are commenting on Lapdancing applications. I know for a fact that they were intending to comment on the Peckham license. (By the way, in case you missed it, Andy, that was me saying that there were/are flaws in the licensing law).

Reflecting on Stanton's repeated comments that:

It has been deeply frustrating that as a local councillor I have been unable to make official representations over the licence in my ward

I think he's talking about us!

He's right: it has been deeply frustrating for all of us that YOU as OUR LOCAL COUNCILLOR have been UNABLE to make official representations over the license in MY WARD.

The DCMS should have clarified: "most [but not all] elected representatives are happy to help residents with this sort of issue."

Peckham lapdancing club withdraws application

2006-07-26T12:57:00.000+01:00

The Blue club Peckham has withdrawn its application for 24 hour strip tease.

Well done to Gordon, Susan, Mark in Lane, and Barrie, Ola and Tayo in Peckham for making sure that your residents knew about the application, and could organize their objections! This is a great result for two teams of hard working Labour councillors

The campaign should become a benchmark for the rest of the members of the council: Picked up immediately from the regular mailings sent to councillors, this campaign had legs days after the initial request went in. The intense lobbying of Southwark Council officers by these local councillors clarified for the benefit of all that members can speak on behalf of their constituents, and what officers think constitutes proximity.

The further lesson is that in areas like Bermondsey, where the Rembrandt club application was only picked up 2 hours before the end of the consultation period, we either need a better consultation, or we need better councillors. I think a better consultation process is an achievable goal for the next 12 months.

Southwark might move consultation wider

2006-07-25T15:17:00.000+01:00

There might be some movement on Southwark's proximity limit for consultation. Negotiations have been going on with the licensing department, and they might not apply a strict 100m limit. Watch this space.

Prayer indeed

2006-07-24T20:46:00.000+01:00

Good grief ... indeed the Salmon youth centre need our prayers ...

http://www.salmoncentre.co.uk/diary.htm

Lane & Peckham Councillors against Lapdancing

2006-07-24T20:11:00.000+01:00

Cllr Susan Jones working for the Lane

I spent Saturday morning helping the Lane team of councillors and C+P activists inform local residents about the license application.

The club is on Peckham High St, currently with a "VIP" sign outside. It is two doors down from the Unity Centre (!). The residents affected are in both the Lane and Peckham wards. The campaign is being co-ordinated across both wards. As the council has imposed a proximity limit of a 100m radius, we went and knocked on those doors. On the Lane side, that meant only about 30 or so properties. Those involved in the Tooley St fiasco will be unsurprised to know that of the 15 or so residents we spoke to, only two knew about the license, and that was only because it had got good coverage in the local news.

VIP club, 2 doors down from Unity Centre

Once informed, nearly all of the local residents wanted to register an objection, and we had some standard letters drawn up by some C+P activists that the residents could sign - the letter is set out along the lines of the governments new licensing law.

In addition, Susan asked if the residents would be able to attend the licensing committee, and offered to speak on their behalf if they couldn't.

Result: 11 objection letters, and at least 5 written mandates for any of the three Lane councillors to speak on behalf of the residents affected.

Great effort by our comrades in the constituency next door, and I was delighted to spend the morning helping out...

Southwark Council does its best to make sure residents not consulted on a strip club

2006-07-19T08:40:00.000+01:00

I hear from the Peckham councillors working with the community on their strip club campaign that some of the council licensing officers are trying to impose a residence proximity of only 100 metres on eligible objections. It's pathetic that our council officers are trying to prevent proper consultation on this issue: learn from Rembrandts - people want to be consulted on these licenses!

Westminster 500 metres may seem a bit all-encompassing, but isn't that the point of a council consulting on a license application? In the context of the Licensing Act's "prevention of nuisance" I think 500 metres is much closer to the tail-off of anti-social behaviour than 100 metres. I hope Southwark Council doesn't fail us again.

Labour council refuses Lap Dancing application

2006-07-19T08:32:00.000+01:00

Comrade Pakes has sent this news from Labour-run Newham:
Pole dancing club application refused17 July 2006
An application to convert a pub in Canning Town into a pole dancing venue has been rejected.

Newham Council's Licensing Sub-Committee heard the application submitted by Klub Class Ltd of Woodford Road, Forest Gate to host pole dancing at the Anchor Pub in Star Lane.At a meeting on July 12 at the Town Hall, East Ham, the committee heard the information presented to it.

Councillor Ian Corbett, Chair of the Licensing Sub-Committee, said: "The application was refused because the committee was not satisfied the application met the criteria required by the Licensing Act in the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm."

Representations were made by Canning Town South councillor Clive Furness, on behalf of residents, head teacher of Star Primary School Marion Rosen, the council's trading standards, health and safety unit and children and young people's services, the London Fire Brigade and residents. The Metropolitan Police submitted a recommendation to introduce conditions to the application.

Prior to the meeting, the applicants had submitted amendments to the application, which had originally included lap dancing as well as changes to the hours from 12noon to 2am to 6pm to 12.30am.

The applicant has 21 days to lodge an appeal at the magistrates' court.

Labour councillors inform their residents of Blues Nightclub

2006-07-17T14:58:00.000+01:00

OK, so this only was put onto the website on the 12th July, last Wednesday. But I am hearing from my comrades in Peckham (where there are NO LIBDEMs) that the local (Labour) Councillors are already ensuring that the local community is fully informed about this license. The address of this new 24 hour lapdancing club, "Blues Nightclub", is right next to St James the Great Roman Catholic Primary School [it might be the other Cathedral's turn on this one]. As Cllr Susan was the first councillor on our i-petition, it's only sensible that she set up one for her constituents.

Info: Police & London Bridge BID Weds 12-2.30pm

2006-07-17T14:45:00.000+01:00

The London Bridge Business District Company, in a joint initiative with the Police, the Safer Southwark Partnership and More London, has organised an event from 12.00 – 2.30pm on Wednesday 19 July, by the fountains at More London Riverside, to provide local workers with information and advice on public safety.

At the event you will be able to meet the Safer Neighbourhood Police Team, pick up information which could help prevent you from experiencing crime in London, offer input into what crime prevention initiatives you think might work, and collect useful kits such as cycle marking and personal safety alarms.

Could Nick have done more?

2006-07-17T14:23:00.000+01:00

Could Nick have spoken at the license application for Rembrandts? While attending one of the meetings discussing the review, I was told that: so long as a local councillor has written permission from an interested party, then that local councillor can speak at the license hearing. An interested party being: people who "live in the vicinity of the premises concerned", and are the only people who can lodge an objection to a license application.

In my response to Southwark's review of their licensing policy, I will ask that Southwark council make explicit that members can speak on behalf of their constituents.

Added on 21st July:

This is what Southwark's Principal Licensing Officer's view is:

"Under the Licensing Act 2003, [the local councillor] will need to supply the names and addresses of the members of [the councillor's] ward area, who wish to have their representation addressed to the licensing committee via your voice. The representations from the members, must relate to one or all of the licensing criteria which is; crime and disorder, public safety, nuisance and protection of children from harm. [The councillor] will also have to have something in writing from your members stating that they wish to put you forward as their representative to present their views."

I hope that now "we know better, we do better"

Landlord says "no" to London Bridge lap dancing club

2006-07-04T14:46:00.000+01:00

Brilliant press release forwarded to me by Val

Plans to open a lap-dancing club at London Bridge against the objections of the Mayor of London, local residents and businesses, look likely to be halted.
Network Rail, the owners of the premises at which the lap dancing club was to be located, have now written to the Mayor making clear that they have no intention of allowing their premises to be used for such a purpose and that the leaseholder will be in breach of their lease if they try to go ahead with the London dancing club.
In correspondence between the Mayor’s Office and Spacia (the trading arm of Network Rail), Spacia have now said:
‘The general objections to the proposed lap dancing club have been noted and I can advise that Network Rail take a similar view. Under the terms of the lease for the premises consent is required for the proposed change of use. Network Rail has refused to grant consent. The leaseholder will not be permitted to use the premises for this purpose and would be in breach of the lease if the use is carried out on the premises.’
Spacia went onto say that:
‘We will be monitoring the situation and will take appropriate action, as determined by Landlord and Tenant law, if the tenant is found to be in breach of their lease.’
Appropriate action for a breach could be a termination of the lease and Network Rail have asked that given the proximity of City Hall, that the Mayor should inform them of any possible breaches to the contract.
Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London said:
‘I welcome Network Rail’s decision. They are to be congratulated on taking their responsibilities to the local area seriously.
‘Local residents and businesses have made clear that they are totally opposed to a lap-dancing club in this area. The result of a similar establishment caused serious nuisance particularly for women working and living in this area.
‘It is a shame that Southwark Council pressed ahead with licensing this strip club without ascertaining whether of not the owners of the premises would allow such a change in the terms of the lease. Throughout this process Southwark have demonstrated a woeful lack of resolve.
‘The correspondence from Network Rail shows how disappointing it was that the London Assembly failed to back women and families living and working in this area by taking a strong stand against this club. The Assembly voted down a motion opposing the strip club and refused to back the local campaign against it. Instead they voted for a motion moved by Lord Tope that merely noted that a strip club was planned and called for monitoring to ensure there was no breach of the license. The Assembly failed to put people working and living in the area first.’
Ends
Notes to editors
1. The lease on these premises (56/58 Tooley Street, SE1) is held by Whitbread plc who have sublet to Rembrandt's Restaurants Ltd.
2. Over 800 local residents, businesses, visitor attractions, employees, trade unions, schools, places of worship and community facilities have signed a petition opposing the lap dancing club in its proposed location

Access Disabled in Southwark

2006-06-29T13:22:00.000+01:00

So, myself and Patrick were having a chat in the beautiful sunshine last night outside Southwark Town Hall. All the protestors wanted to watch the deputation, which meant they had to leave the banners outside. Someone had to watch over them, and I decided that should be me. Patrick had turned up to watch the deputation, but sadly couldn't get into the gallery.

The reason? The lift had broken ...

And not only had the lift broken (that is the lift in Southwark Town Hall!) but Patrick was told that the lift would remain unrepaired for a fortnight because they couldn't find the parts.

That the bad lift disease that Southwark seems to suffer from has extended even to the Town Hall itself makes one despair a little. (According to the London Fire Brigade, over 50% of their call-outs in Southwark are to free people from broken lifts.)

Getting the Licensing Policy changed (2)

2006-06-29T13:14:00.000+01:00

Patrick Horan from the Southwark Disablement Association has been a regular attendee at the Southwark Stakeholders meetings, and last night he also turned up to the council chambers to see the deputation and hear the debate.

Patrick wants to see the Licensing Policy to link disabled access to the licensing decision, and makes a forceful case for it to be so. He is not the only one who has views on Southwark's licensing policy. Pat from Shad Thames also has a number of points that she wants sorted out. I'm quite looking forward to the debate at the Bermondsey Community Council meeting, will be quite good fun.

Myself and Patrick had a good chat outside the chambers in the sun last night. He's a determined campaigner, and I'm sure he will have impact on the licensing debate.

Getting the Licensing Policy changed (1)

2006-06-29T10:30:00.000+01:00

Outside the Town Hall
Originally uploaded by Cormac.

Result: unanimous councillor support for reviewing the licensing policy. Most importantly we get the proximity option in the review, also we complain to the government that councillors should be allowed to speak at licensing hearings (fine).

The council heard a deputation from a number of local people. The Shad Thames contribution was excellent, and gave the councillors much pause for thought. Fiona gave Nick hell for his comments on raffish behaviour. And the wonderful Susan Elan Jones pointed out that the council's internet security system wouldn't let her research "lap-dancing" so it seemed a bit daft not to have a stronger licensing policy (she's going to be an asset for the Southwark community).

Next step is to take this to community council, and make sure we see this through.

Holy Trinity, Dockhead says "No Lapdancing!"

2006-06-26T21:36:00.000+01:00

A big thank-you to Fr. Alan, and the parishioners of Dockhead church. The parish newsletter had the following comment:

A lapdancing club here will severely affect the quality of life that people who live and work in the community have come to expect and enjoy, giving rise to increased crime and disorder, make the area less safe, and create a public nuisance. There are now 24 facilities for children within a small radius of the proposed club, and it is estimated by the Pool of London Partnership that between 300 and 4,000 children would walk past the club daily. Please sign the petition at the back Church this weekend

Approx. 350 parishioners signed the No Lapdancing petition after the three Masses this weekend. That fantastic upswell against the licensing policy will go to the 400 already in GLA Unison branch's petition. The deputation from the many groups opposed to the license will be at Southwark Council this Wednesday so that they can put pressure on the council to change the licensing policy (meeting at 6pm outside Southwark Council Chambers, corner of Havill Rd and Peckham Rd). Shad Thames Residents Association and the Tooley Street Tenants and Residents Association are running an internet petition, to sign the petition go to here.

Potter's field and the new Trust: trustworthy?

2006-06-25T21:11:00.000+01:00

Are we already getting bureaucratic creep at the Potter's field trust? Alan Chapman is on the trust, as one of two resident's representatives. He seemed a little worried when he gave his report to the Shad Thames Association last week on the way things were going at the only months old trust.

The original intentions presented to the Council assembly in December, spoke about a modest income and on-going cost of around 100k, and the aspirations of a wonderful, world-class park.

It appears, however, that our friends in the trust (More London, Southwark Council, GLA, and some residents) now feel that they have to hire a new head gardener, but even worse, they need a full time promoter to promote the park as a venue. The costs of the park have risen so much, they need to get more events onto our park so that they can pay for everything.

So, already Alan is worried that the priority of the trust is not to ensure a great park, where we all the residents lounge at weekends and during the week, Ernst & Young employees eat their lunch.

Nick is chair of the trust by the way.

Defeated Councillor for Elephant Regeneration moves smoothly to lobbying for the Regeneration contract

2006-06-23T16:15:00.000+01:00

Residents of East Walworth will be happy to know that their former councillor, former deputy leader of Southwark, Catherine Bowman will still be protecting the interests of the people of not only East Walworth, but particularly Elephant and Castle, even though she's no longer chair of the Elephant and Castle regeneration.

According to PR week, ex-Cllr Bowman has now got a job at Media Strategy:

Media Strategy has bolstered its ranks with the employment of Catherine Bowman, previously deputy leader of Southwark Council, as an associate.

And, her concern for her former constituents is clear from the job description:

She will concentrate on the agency’s work for Oceancrest, a consortium that is bidding to redevelop the Elephant & Castle district in London.

So quickly after losing the election, and sadly having to give up directing this billion pound regeneration, she's already got a job so that she can continue to protect the interests of her former constituents. Such selflessness does not go unnoticed.

Their licensing priorities for us: naked women but no ice cream

2006-06-22T22:11:00.000+01:00

Are the Council really trying to return Old Southwark to its middle ages main line of business? I've already pointed to Cllr Stanton's view on this, but now I wonder if, behind his jovial flippancy (and he is so very personable), is there a more sinister plan.

One of my Peckham Cllr comrades told me this evening that the Licensing committee had debated tonight on whether Southwark should ban ice cream vans from the river front, from the Southwark/Lambeth borders all the way down to St Saviour's dock. Comrade Cllr Livingstone grinned as he concluded "these Liberals won't ban lap dancing bars, but will ban ice cream vans."

Is this the thin end of the wedge? They put a lap dancing bar in between all those children's activities in Tooley street, and then ban ice cream vans so that no kiddies turn up, the kiddies attractions closes down, we get more lap dancing bars ... The horror! Simon and Nick cackling over some super dooper map of Bankside and Shad Thames, but we are saved by the appearance of the caped Labour group with their red speedos on outside their crisp new Labour suits, which is so disturbing I wake from my fevered nightmare

Currently, our best electoral asset locally keeps sending his constituents letters on this issue saying "I can't take a moral stand on this lap dancing issue." That's what the law says already Simon, and implementing that same law properly like in Westminster still gets us the decent policy which we want!

I heard all this when I attended the Southwark Labour policy making body which, since tonight now officially has adopted as policy the ambition to get us the same protection as Westminster. The rest I just made up now

Compass conference

2006-06-20T17:29:00.000+01:00

I think Roy Hattersley said of the Labour government that it wasn't he that had moved to the left. His politics stayed the same while ours moved past him.

That about covers my reaction to Compass for two reasons: first, they like their quotes, so this comment needed one too. (The Compass quote that most tickled me was from Comrade Bevan: "We know what happens to people who stay in the middle of the road: they get run down"); second, I'm a little surprised that even though I regard(ed) myself as a Blairite, I also agreed with everyone at the Compass conference - Comrades (!) in Red Pepper, Unison etc.

It was a broad based, dogged determination to hammer out what a fourth term Labour government will look like. Really nice to be able to participate in a sensible debate on policy. Compass are publishing their manifesto at the end of this year, so I'm looking forward to it.

Personally I thought there was gravitas and seriousness by the spades without needing to borrow from some quotes. Though, I suppose I would never have seen the Nye Bevan quote.

Linking with Trade Unions

2006-06-16T08:32:00.000+01:00

I never really got trade unions until I went to the UAF conference this year. Up on the main stand were representatives of a diverse group, but it seemed to me that the glue was being provided by the trade union members. All of those trade unionists were very political, but they weren't (being) party political. They had a clear vision of a diverse inclusive society, and were intent on providing guidance and support, and leadership to a broad based group of interested parties. A kind of politics I prefer than what I see in parliament-tv.

The T&G are big supporters of the living wage campaign, and also of the broad based London Citizens organisation. But when the T&G held their demonstration outside the Old Vic last year to highlight the living wage campaign, no-one called our CLP to provide demonstrators. In fact, Bermondsey is probably one of two or three areas in London where most of the City cleaners live. And yet, where are the T&G (Amicus, Unison, GMB etc, etc)? [Footnote: Not entirely fair for me to say this, because most people in Bermondsey used to say: where's the Labour party - when I was leafletting St Olave's estate one Saturday in March, one resident did ask me, "You're from the Labour party? Does that mean you're back?" right]

So that's the context for last night, when our (T&G) Chair of our CLP invited along Barry Camfield (Asst Gen Sec of T&G) to talk about Labour party links. And I was really excited by what he had to say about rebuilding Union links. And what he said was so simple, but also so very ambitious. He wanted to rebuild grassroots links on issue based campaigning. I couldn't agree more.

I didn't get the chance to ask him questions, there were too many knee jerk comments from colleagues on certain of his other (socialist) comments, but Barry's comments will give another filip to those of us in the Constituency who see the next two to three years as a hearts and minds campaign. Issue based politics will be a major part of what we want to do. But definitely, we, as a CLP, also need a lot of help from Trade Unionists if we're to win back the Constituency.

The lap-dancing club campaign is a good case in point. There is a Unison branch around which the campaign is grouping. Nice, non-party political group, who does all the work, and who party members can support. However, the lap-dancing club campaign also has highlighted the weakness in the local union branches - I still can't find out a contact name for Unison in Guy's Hospital...

Now, before you think I've gone all Lib Dem, let me just make add that Bermondsey know who their local Labour party activists are, (in Riverside ward, where have you been if you don't know?) and I also stand up in meetings as the representative of the local Labour party.

We are deep in enemy territory with a Lib Dem MP. Trade Unions and local campaigns will win it back for us.

Anyone fancy a Living Wage stall at the Blue? T&G London organiser please contact me, we will have 10-20 Bermondsey members on site before you can say Alfred Salter.

Rembrandt strip club

2006-06-14T22:31:00.000+01:00

In the same week that our ward councillor spoke about how he hoped to protect Southwark's "raffish, bohemian and slightly anarchic" quality where, "400 years ago, this was the place in London to get screwed, get pissed and take in a show", the area's local residents and businesses met to prevent precisely that slide back into the past.

There are now 420 separate signatories to a petition against the Tooley Street strip club. The meeting at City Hall provided an update from the City Hall team that have been supporting local residents to oppose the license for Rembrandt's. I was hoping that tonight we would get a breakthrough from the legal team that had been appealing Southwark Council's renegotiation of the Rembrandt's license. However, the legal advice has unfortunately been to retire from the field.

I was quite disappointed, as there seemed at the last City Hall meeting to be some hope: it had been reported that the barristers could not figure out how Southwark had managed to renegotiate the license. It seems that the actions of our council so flummoxed the legal eagles that we are left to wait for the club to open (the license can be reviewed if we as local residents monitor the effects of the club).

That leaves us with changing Southwark's licensing policy. We campaigned about this aggressively since February, not always to people's taste, but there are lots of other local people who have experienced club wicked who share our view.

It's quite simple: both Westminster and Camden have licensing policy which is drawn up to ensure that no licenses are granted in proximity to Residential accommodation, Schools, Places of Worship or Community facilities or public buildings; we want that in Southwark. The residents are therefore resolved to present a deputation to Southwark council to ensure that Cllr Fiona Colley's motion to review the policy is carried.

The residents will be gathering from 6pm ahead of that Council meeting at the Town Hall from 7pm on 28th June. If you can't be there, sign the petition here.

2006-06-13T19:38:00.000+01:00

Living in Bermondsey, 3 Lib Dem councillors, a Lib-Dem/Tory coalition running the council, a Lib-Dem MP, but with a 6% swing to Labour in the last two elections.