BHANGEELAAR! Diagnosing the current state of undemocratic activity replaced by collusion by Tower Hamlets Council with the CONDEM attacks on the commu

1050 Hrs GMT
London
Sunday
05 December 2010

Editor © Muhammad Haque

You say
[Quote]:
He accused the Government last night (Wednesday) of having to do their “dirty work” as the country’s third-most deprived borough is slapped with economies of £80 million over the next four years, as part of the national push to get Britain out of the world recession.
[Unquote].

But you don’t cite any evidence that is supposed to be the basis of that statement. Similarly you don’t say what verifiably objective contribution the majority of the Borough’s “elected” councillors made – if any at all - to the Council’s concluding, as you report, that cuts at the average rate of £20 million per year would have to be made “over the next four years”.
What is the significance of “elected councillors” [being assumed to be “active” but] not shown to be doing anything of central relevance to the community in whose name they “serve” [!] as they “continue” in their positions paid for by the public and in the name of the Borough’s population.
The sentence containing the phrases “having to do” the “dirty work” of the “Government” suggests that a clear unambiguous direction must have come from the CONDEM regime. If so, when had the direction come?
If no such direction has come then what other evidential justification have you seen for your using that statement?
Whatever the details of the contact between the CONDEM regime and Tower Hamlets Council , the coverage of the cuts programme shows that it has been accepted by the ‘decision-makers’ in the Council that cuts must be made. Which raises the question about Tower Hamlets Council’s bureaucracy’s past claims about those past spending decisions!
Our updater objective study of the reporting by the “East London Advertiser” of Tower Hamlets over the past TWENTY years shows that the Council has NEVER admitted that any of its consultants or other contractors who had been paid exorbitant amounts had been avoidably engaged or hired!
Which means that NOTHING that Tower Hamlets Council's bureaucracy says about spending and efficiency and standard of service must be trusted without accompanying evidence of rigorous scrutiny having taken place of every single critical spending allocation and decision.
Where is the democratic mechanism for such rigorous scrutiny in the present Tower Hamlets Council?
And if there is no such mechanism active now, what is the point of suggesting that the current bureaucracy is any more honest about its claimed concerns for the people in the Borough than it ever has been in the past?
1030 Hrs Sunday
05 December 2010
BHANGEELAAR!
THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST AN ELECTED EXECUTIVE MAYOR IN TOWER HAMLETS


From the web site of the "East London Advertiser"


Mayor Rahman... ready to axe staff

Boycotted Tower Hamlets Mayor Rahman left holding budget baby
Mike Brooke,
Features Editor
Thursday,
2 December, 2010
19:30 PM



THE ‘big crunch’ comes next week as Tower Hamlets Mayor Lutfur Rahman gets ready to sack 200 council staff and another 300 agency workers when Downing Street spells out the cuts facing London’s East End from April.

Share
Your View
Email
Print
Got a Story?

$m.local.rateString


-->
$(document).ready(function() {
$("#send-to-friend-email").validationAideEnable(null, {fieldErrorCssClass:'error', summaryMessage:'You have the following errors'});
});
To send a link to this page to a friend, simply enter their email address below.
The message will include the name and email address you gave us when you signed up.Email address
Send link

He accused the Government last night (Wednesday) of having to do their “dirty work” as the country’s third-most deprived borough is slapped with economies of £80 million over the next four years, as part of the national push to get Britain out of the world recession.
Mayor Rahman—the man sacked by Labour in the run-up to his election as Mayor—is left holding the baby.
He faces the Coalition Government head on with a Town Hall boycott at his back—neither of the two political parties on the council will join him to face the onslaught.
“The Con-Dems are forcing us to do their dirty work,” he told last night’s crisis cabinet meeting at the Town Hall.
“The sadness and anger I feel is the over-zealous cuts being forced on us that threaten the heart of our community.”
He called for “bickering” councillors to join him to take the Government on.
“I call on the two major parties who’ve decided not to work with me to end the petty bickering,” he urged.
“They should help me protect hundreds of thousands of people across the East End.”
But his comments—targeted at the majority Labour group still feeling miffed at his running as an independent against their official candidate for Mayor in October—fell on deaf ears.
As for the Tory Opposition, they were just being Tories and would not get into bed with the former Labour council leader.
His cabinet member for resources, Alibor Choudhury, said: “These Government cuts are a sledgehammer to the poorest and most impoverished areas designed to cause chaos, especially to inner-city boroughs like Tower Hamlets.”
The authority had allowed for 25 per cent cuts in Government grants, he explained, but it was going to be more.
“We only have 12 weeks left to set next year’s budget,” added Cllr Choudhury. “We are unsure even now what effect it’s going to have on the community.”
But the Town Hall does have a framework in place. Costly management is being streamlined, agency workers are being dropped, council offices at Blackwall’s luxury Anchorage House office block are being closed by 2013 to save £7m and there’s hard bargaining ahead with suppliers and contractors to save £3m a month from April.
It means 500 posts lost, including 200 permanent staff. But an £8m kitty is being set aside for redundancy handouts.
The last one out of the Town Hall at night will turn the lights off.

Sign in to have your say
BHANGEELAAR! comment [Sunday 05 December 2010] to the above online item
on the "East London Advertiser" web site



You say:

[Quote]:
He accused the Government last night (Wednesday) of having to do their “dirty work” as the country’s third-most deprived borough is slapped with economies of £80 million over the next four years, as part of the national push to get Britain out of the world recession.
[Unquote].

But you don’t cite any evidence that is supposed to be the basis of that statement. Similarly you don’t say what verifiably objective contribution the majority of the Borough’s “elected” councillors made – if any at all - to the Council’s concluding, as you report, that cuts at the average rate of £20 million per year would have to be made “over the next four years”.

What is the significance of “elected councillors” [being assumed to be “active” but] not shown to be doing anything of central relevance to the community in whose name they “serve” [!] as they “continue” in their positions paid for by the public and in the name of the Borough’s population.
The sentence containing the phrases “having to do” the “dirty work” of the “Government” suggests that a clear unambiguous direction must have come from the CONDEM regime.
If so, when had the direction come? If no such direction has come then what other evidential justification have you seen for your using that statement?
Whatever the details of the contact between the CONDEM regime and Tower Hamlets Council , the coverage of the cuts programme shows that it has been accepted by the ‘decision-makers’ in the Council that cuts must be made.
Which raises the question about Tower Hamlets Council’s bureaucracy’s past claims about those past spending decisions!
Our updater objective study of the reporting by the “East London Advertiser” of Tower Hamlets over the past TWENTY years shows that the Council has NEVER admitted that any of its consultants or other contractors who had been paid exorbitant amounts had been avoidably engaged or hired!
Which means that NOTHING that Tower Hamlets Council's bureaucracy says about spending and efficiency and standard of service must be trusted without accompanying evidence of rigorous scrutiny having taken place of every single critical spending allocation and decision.
Where is the democratic mechanism for such rigorous scrutiny in the present Tower Hamlets Council?
And if there is no such mechanism active now, what is the point of suggesting that the current bureaucracy is any more honest about its claimed concerns for the people in the Borough than it ever has been in the past? 1030 Hrs
Sunday 05 December 2010
BHANGEELAAR! THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST AN ELECTED EXECUTIVE MAYOR IN TOWER HAMLETS
Add your view Report this comment
Bhangeelaar!
Sunday, December 5, 2010

$comment.rating

Average Rating

-->

You have successfully posted your view.
Your view
Welcome Muhammad Haque, please leave your message below.
Your view

Photo
Optional - JPG files only

Description

Audio
Optional - MP3 files only

Description

Video
Optional - 3GP, AVI, MOV, MPG or WMV files

Description

Submit
function loadCommentsDynamic(json) {
if( json.loginStatus.email ) {
$('#frm-email-input').val( json.loginStatus.email );
}
if (json.loginStatus.loggedIn) {
$('.loggedout').empty();
$('#username').text( json.loginStatus.userName );
} else {
$('.loggedin').empty();
}
}

$(document).ready(function() {
$.getJSON('/ajax?action=loginStatus', loadCommentsDynamic);
});
More News
Youth orchestra prepare for winter celebration
Learn arts and crafts at Back to Basics Christmas fair
Victoria Park Reindeer Run cancelled
Do you know any good Samaritans who helped the needy in the snow?
Fashionistas raise cash for Art Against Knives
East London arts groups prepare for funding cuts
Soldiers take to nightclub stage to support Help for Heroes
East End’s poor kids get worst deal
An extra 500 trees promised for East End
Mums slam maternity care in the East End
');
//-->