Come on Jeremy raise the stakes: get tough, get leading
The Tory Party is seriously on the back foot. The Brexit wing needs no help from us, though it might get plenty from traditional Labour voters, but the Cameron “mainstream” desperately needs Labour help for this crazy referendum campaign.
Here we are the largest party in the country, by a country mile, and we are being shafted by a Government, which assumes that Labour will do the right thing. We are always doing the “right thing”; we are always taking the “one nation”, “all in this together” approach whilst the Tories stuff the pockets of the rich and the rentier class.
I can’t be the only Labour activist who seriously wonders whether the future of this country isn’t more dependent upon defeating the Tories, possibly for a generation, than it is on staying in the, let’s face it, struggling EU. Its pretty much an “on balance” decision for me and many other party sympathisers.
Now what would swing it for me would be a few concessions from Cameron. Take your pick from attacking “welfare”, abolishing Bedroom Tax, scrapping the Trade Union Bill, opening real discussions about boundary redistribution, stopping “right to buy” housing association properties, ending so-called schools reforms and NHS restructuring, ending the continual and vicious attack on immigration and immigrants.
Jeremy: this is a wonderful opportunity to get the Tories talking some sensible politics. You have a great opportunity to earn their respect, grudging though of course it will of necessity be, and to win the support of the country. Your best bet for winning support in the PLP is by winning respect from the Tories and you will never have a better opportunity than when Cameron is down, with his face in the sand.
Councillor Tony Belton’s Latchmere February Newsletter (# 69)
January highlights
- Last month, I talked a little about the Council’s threat to close Battersea Sports Centre (BSC) in Hope Street, in the autumn of this year. As I said then, this was a complete surprise to users, local residents and we three Latchmere councillors. Imagine our surprise therefore when the Tory councillors became really upset because we did NOT support the closure at the 21st January Housing Committee meeting. One of them, the Deputy Leader, even circulated a rather childish and extremely unhelpful leaflet, accusing us of double-crossing them.
- I had better explain. So far we three Labour councillors, that’s Wendy Speck, Simon Hogg and I, have worked fairly closely with the Council on the consultations and decisions involved in such a massive scheme as the regeneration of the Winstanley/York Road estates. It does after all involve the demolition of some 600 or so properties, most notably but not just Pennethorne, Scholey and Holcroft Houses, and the construction of many more new homes. Tenants and leaseholders (and a small number of freeholders) will have their homes demolished and rebuilt in what will be a major upheaval – or at least that is the plan. Clearly the Council would like to have the whole-hearted support of all.
- You might ask what has that got to do with the closure of BSC – and it would be a good question. Well somehow or another in the minds of the Town Hall bureaucrats and their Tory bosses the closure of BSC had become an essential part of the whole plan for regeneration. The only trouble is that they had not bothered to tell anyone until the day of the January Committee meeting, having announced the closure more than a month previously. Not surprisingly both the community and we, Labour councillors, were already committed to opposing the BSC closure before they made the link. They should not really be surprised. The regeneration plan has been in gestation for three years and its link with the BSC has not been mentioned until this January. What is more the Council was making a completely separate claim in December that the BSC closure would be providing more affordable homes and not JUST replacement homes for the Winstanley!
- The plan apparently is to use the site of the Sports Centre to build some 90 affordable units into which people from the York Road and Winstanley estates could be “decanted”. Our opposition to the BSC closure has already resulted in some back-tracking and some compromises. For example, the Council is now committed to providing a new all-weather, large soccer pitch at the south end of Falcon Park. But the Sports Centre is very busily and much more than a soccer pitch and is used by well over 20 sports clubs and local organisations and it is not as though the area is over-endowed with alternatives. We will continue to oppose closure until more is known about the replacement facilities, and the timing of their arrival.
- After all “What did the Council’s own reports about the 2011 riots say?” That there was not a lot for young people to do in the area. But now the Tory councillors want to close down one of the busiest centres of them all! There is a petition for signature at the following address http://www.willtowin.org.uk/#!save-battersea-sports-centre/c150j if you wish to express your opposition.
- The Planning Applications Committee met on the 20th. There were no significant local applications this month but the trend to convert pubs to housing continues apace. This time the closure of the Prince of Wales on the corner of Surrey Lane and Battersea Bridge Road was confirmed but that was only the last in a long line. I can think of lots in Latchmere alone: the most recent being the Duke of Wellington, the Havelock Arms, the Grove and the Prince’s Head, but I am sure you can add to the list. The disappearance of pubs, one after another, marks the loss of important community assets, which we should safeguard.
- One event that most of you will have missed, I am sure, was the launch of Wandsworth Radio on 12th January. I understand that it had some 3,000 listeners in the first week – we wish it well. To listen just Google Wandsworth Radio.
- I actually missed the launch because as I said last month I went into hospital for an “arthroscopy”. Although I said then that I would say more this month, there isn’t actually that much to say. My knee is not back to normal and it’s not killing me. But, I am afraid the story has not ended yet!
- There was a Council Meeting on 28th January but it was largely inconsequential except for the surprise announcement of the possible merger of Wandsworth and Richmond-upon-Thames Councils. The first thing to say about this is that this cannot be a full merger in every sense of the word as the London Boroughs were set-up by Act of Parliament (London Government Act, 1963) and can only be merged, abolished or changed by Parliament. However the Tory Leaders of the two Councils have decided that there should be economies of scale in merging many of the two Council’s operations. Hence rather than having two refuse collection services they can make do with one. Instead of having two education departments they can make do with one. Instead of having two Chief Executives, two Housing Directors, two Borough planners, etc., they can make do with having just the one.
- There are some obvious ways in which this plan makes sense, although it is interesting to speculate what would happen if one of the authorities went Labour and just how a Tory and a Labour authority would work together as one. But there are also many other implications, not least that the savings being discussed can only be as a result of losing about 500 jobs in the two Boroughs. But one remarkable thing about the whole process is that we are embarking on this whole adventure on the say so of two men, Ravi Govindia of Wandsworth and Lord True of Richmond-upon-Thames. There has as yet been no Council decision in either borough, no referendum amongst the people – nothing! No doubt we shall learn more with time but meanwhile we wait and listen.
- I went to the Ram Brewery redevelopment launch (Model pictured right but not including the 42 storey Tower block) on 2nd February, had an Education and Children’s Services Committee on 12th and then of course there was Valentine’s Day, although that isn’t yet a Council event!
- On 18th February I have the Planning Applications Committee and then on the 19th a discussion of the two Borough merger at the Finance Committee.
In response to some of your comments.
Thanks, Viv and Shirley, for your best wishes re the operation
– as stated above fairly, or indeed totally, painless but not sure unfortunately that it has done the job! Daniel and Kathleen were of course right in describing this picture as the alleyway between Cabul Road and Latchmere Road and Daniel was right also in thinking that I thought it would be called a snicket. But he tells me that it could be either a ginnel or a snicket, but that it is actually too wide for either. I bow to the expertise of a real Tyke.
Kathleen was also right in saying that the gypsy encampment is right down the bottom of Culvert Road, between all the railway lines. I managed to get into the encampment purely by chance when taking a dozen or so people on a History Walk of Battersea. The only other way to see it is from the train but not just any old train. I think, but would be
happy to be corrected, that the Overground Line from CJ’s Platform 2 to Wandsworth Road might be the best place to see it. By the way, if anyone is interested in going on the History Walk, which goes from the Latchmere pub to Battersea Arts Centre and takes a couple of hours, I am doing it next as part of the Wandsworth Heritage Festival on 24th May. Just let me know and I will book you in – but I should say that I do it as a Labour Party fund-raiser and charge £10.
However, I have had no reply to the question about the third picture: “what and where is this”? I have to admit that it was difficult to take a very clear picture but it is a boot scraper set in the wall. There are 3 or 4 in consecutive houses on the west side of Latchmere Road immediately opposite Knowsley Road. This is the best preserved of the set and is at 46 Latchmere Road.
Thatcher and her Jewel in the Crown
One or two Tory friends have asked me for my thoughts on Mrs Thatcher particularly in the context of me being Leader of the Opposition in Wandsworth, the proclaimed Jewel in the Crown, when she became PM and for most of her time in office. So you can blame this piece – which obviously concentrates on a Wandsworth perspective and not the national one being covered in a million other places – on them.
First here is a short story about the 1982 Borough Election. Although 1986 was statistically the closest Wandsworth Borough Election (Labour won more votes, by a couple of hundred or so, but the Tories squeaked in by 31 seats to 30) for me 1982 was the real turning point. A month before Election Day a Labour victory was a certainty. Mrs Thatcher was as unpopular across the country as was “Chopper” Chris Chope, the Tory Leader of Wandsworth. And then in classic manner her two most famous enemies – the trade unions and Argentinian General Galtieri – jumped in to rescue Wandsworth’s Tories.
Wandsworth Tories had been struggling with the unions over improving refuse collection, which was riven by cronyism and archaic working practises. But there was no real will on the unions’ part to negotiate and so the Tories decided in late March 1982 to gamble on the then innovative policy of putting it out to tender. It might now seem to be a “no brainer” but at the time it was a bold step to take.
My heart sank a few days later when two local union bosses came to see me to announce, with obvious delighted self-satisfaction, that they were calling a strike in time for the election. They were a little taken aback by my negative reaction but not sufficiently to change their minds.
Then on 2nd April Argentina invaded the Falklands; on 2nd May the Argentinian light cruiser Belgrano was sunk by the British Navy and on the 4th HMS Sheffield was sunk by an Exocet missile. On the 6th May Wandsworth went to the polls and although the Tories lost a couple of seats they were back in by 33 seats to 27 with 1 Lib/Dem. In five weeks Mrs. Thatcher’s political career was forged, and you could say mine destroyed, as any hope of Labour winning in Wandsworth had gone with the wind.
This story captures two features of Mrs Thatcher’s career. First, it has to be acknowledged, her boldness and second the luck she had with her enemies, whether Scargill and Foot or Galtieri – these two features were not lacking in Wandsworth either.
Wandsworth’s Tories were bold to take on the unions, who in their turn were crass in their failure to recognise the limits both of their power and of their support. The unions still flush with their “success” in the 1970s did not understand that the public were prepared not to have their bins collected for a week or so if the Council was able to tough things out and to win the conflict.
The Tories were also bold to take on the GLC and the ILEA, though whether for good or ill is of course another matter. Although it is a very different animal, there was no opposition to Tony Blair’s decision to restore some form of city-wide Assembly, now the Mayor and the GLA. No, lack of courage is not a criticism that I would ever have made against Wandsworth’s Tories in the 1980s.
The Labour Party (me?) also made our mistakes, most particularly about council house sales (RTB). Labour councillor Nigel Morgan and I argued that straight opposition to sales was never going to work. We foresaw the consequential modern disaster of the lack of social housing and, therefore, argued that capital receipts should be used to build replacements. But this was a sophisticated position, which got lost in the ferocious and noisy national battle over the issue. Ironically our position is now accepted even by the current Cameron Government – Nigel, if you ever read this, get in touch. We were right and everyone else wrong!
The impact of RTB in Wandsworth has been dramatic. I would argue that it is a major feature in pushing Wandsworth up the wealth leagues of London Boroughs to the considerable benefit of some of the population and at a far greater cost to many of the others. Wandsworth is now one of the most harshly divided of all Boroughs with levels of deprivation in a few areas alongside some of the richest parts of the country.
Populist but heartless, bold and assertive but bullying and overbearing, are descriptions that are almost inter-changeable for Thatcher and Chope and the Wandsworth Tories in the 1980s.
Much of the national coverage focusses on the apparently inevitable long-term impacts of Mrs T. How she put the Gr8 back into Britain – you know the argument. It is the Tory line in Wandsworth too. I guess they would say that it is commanding the narrative. Hence Wandsworth was, in their mythology, sinking in the mire of the winter of discontent until they arrived to rescue it and make it the “Brighter Borough”. Wandsworth even has, in its way, its own Ted Heath: he was Dennis Mallam, Tory Leader through the 1970s and then dropped as soon as decently possible just prior to the Thatcher victory of ’79. Poor old Dennis! He was really wet. He wanted to build more council houses than Labour had done!
Well you don’t have to be very much on the left to have a very different narrative. One that concentrates on community and abhors the individualised “Loadsamoney” culture that is so publicly associated with Thatcherism. And again this division between communal values and rampant individualism is mirrored in Wandsworth, perhaps especially in Battersea where everyone knows how different life is depending upon which side of the tracks you happen to be – the mainline from Waterloo to the south west. Is it a complete coincidence that one of the worst scenes of violence in the riots of August, 2011, the Clapham Junction riots, happened on the very border between great wealth and great poverty?
There are other interesting parallels between Wandsworth and the country, which reflect the impact of both Thatcher and the Wandsworth Tories. Mrs T brought in “Big Bang”, hence liberating the City to become the bloated, dangerously over-powerful driver of the British economy. And, funnily enough, one of the biggest residential concentrations of bankers in the country is right here in Wandsworth, attracted by the once cheap housing that used to be the homes of industrial workers and the low rates/Community Charge/Council Tax. For the wastelands of the industrial north read the very large but completely obliterated industrial area of Wandsworth’s riverside – all now given over to expensive and rather barren flats, many of which are owned or rented not by Londoners and are left empty for long periods of the week and of the year.
So my Tory friends, what in summary is my reaction to the news of her death? To the fact of death – nothing much – but to her heritage. In 1979 GB was the most egalitarian it has ever been and now 33 years later we are at levels of inequality not seen since 1913. In 1979 we had a trade union movement that was clearly out of control but now we have one so palpably weak it is becoming a danger the other way, with the Tory right arguing for yet more “business friendly” rules and leading moves not to a high wage, high skill economy but to a dog-eat-dog, low pay and low skills economy.
In 1979 you Tories feared that we were the sick man of Europe (which we never were, of course) and had lost the respect, which you think other countries should show us. In 2013 we are the tax haven of choice for everyone from Russian pluto/kleptocrats to foot-loose business money. And yet, the mood and moment of the 2012 Olympics, so different and so unThatcherite, has gone far to show that their is another way – success through harmony.
For sure it is a complex heritage and clearly you, Tory friends, do not understand why not everyone does not see it your way. But until you do you will not even see the terrible damage she did to many regions of the country and to many people in all the regions.
Bedroom Tax – and as for the Lib/Dems?
I left out the Lib/Dems from my last blog re marginal constituencies – perhaps it’s because I come from Lib/Dem free Wandsworth but a reader pointed out that it has a potential impact on them too, so here is my analysis of top Lib/Dem marginals.
Of the top five marginal Lib/Dem:Labour seats three have majorities less than the number of households affected by the Bedroom Tax!
They are:
Norwich South; 310; 1973
Bradford East: 365: 1023:
Brent Central: 1345: 1057: majority greater
Burnley: 1818: 957: majority greater
Manchester, Withington: 1894: 2678
Bedroom Tax – the political impact on the Tories
What I did not say yesterday was that in 17 of the 20 tightest Tory:Labour marginals the number of households affected, and I mean households and not voters, is greater than the Tory majority in 2010.
The data is by constituency:
Constituency: Majority: Households affected
1. North Warwickshire: 54: 766
2. Cambourne and Redruth: 66: 454
3. Thurrock: 92: 1140
4. Hendon: 106: 680
5. Oxford and West Abingdon: 176: 572
6. Cardiff North: 194: 1067
7. Sherwood: 214: 804
8. Stockton South: 332: 1431
9. Lancaster and Fleetwood: 333: 555:
10. Broxtowe: 389: 581
11. Truro and Redruth: 435: 500
12. Newton Abbot: 523: 326: majority greater
13. Amber Valley: 536: 559
14. Wolverhampton South West: 691: 1396
15. Waveney: 769: 788
16. Carlisle: 853: 1181
17. Morecombe and Lunesdale: 866: 700: majority greater
18. Weaver Vale: 991: 1397
19. Harrogate and Knaresborough: 1039: 684: majority greater
20. Lincoln: 1058: 1155
One has to ask: Did they know what they were doing when they introduced this abomination and of course the resounding answer is NO.
Bedroom Tax – How Tory councillors fail to support their own constituents
Most of us are now well aware that the poorest in our community face a deluge of damaging benefit cuts on Monday, 1st April, including the vile Bedroom Tax. I will write another blog, another day about the vicious nature of this tax and just what it displays of Tory attitudes to council or social sector tenancies, but today I wanted to focus on the particular impact in Wandsworth.
The Guardian has just produced a very helpful map of where the impact is greatest and in its commentary says that the impact is counter-intuitive. I think that means that the journalist expected the hardest hit areas to be the great northern industrial cities. But in fact the worst hit single area of all is Wandsworth and the whole south east region including many of the most affluent parts are almost as hard hit. So whilst the “tax” for having one bedroom “too many” in Wandsworth is £912 per household per year, just down the road in Esther it is £851 and in Kensington it is £839.
This is because the tax is a function of the rent levels and with much lower rents in, say, Hull the impact on individual tenant households is rather less; actually it is £489 in Hull. But there are more than 2,000 households affected in each of the three Hull constituencies and only about 900 in each of the three Wandsworth ones.
Bizarrely this means that Wandsworth Tories have been aggressively promoting this vicious “tax”, which results in hitting their constituents harder than anywhere else in the country. It also means that they are supporting a policy, which is taking approximately £3.5 million out of the Borough’s economy. Knowing the area, as I do, this will cut living standards in Roehampton and Latchmere (the council flats on north-side of Clapham Junction station), where ironically the Council is now looking to invest £100 million precisely because of the under-privileged nature of the area.
Irony of ironies this is happening in the very same week as millionaires are getting £100,000 p.a. tax cuts and given that there are said to be 6,000 of them in the country, with Wandsworth’s share at least 35, what we see here is a Cameron/Osborne swap of money from the poor to the rich. And what do we know about the relative spending habits of rich and poor? Well for one the rich are more likely to spend some of their money in St. Tropez and Bermuda and much less likely to be spending it in the rundown shopping areas of Falcon Road and Danebury Avenue (the two main shopping streets in Latchmere and Roehampton).
I hate to think what Robin Hood would have made of it all but I can’t see how any Tory can be seriously surprised if we have many more civil disturbances – or at very least massive refusals to pay rent.
Affordable Housing Battersea Style
I want to tell a story about affordable housing Battersea style.
Sister’s Avenue is a road full of rather grand Victorian houses, including one Victorian block of Mansions, running from Lavender Hill through to Clapham Common. At some time during WWII a bomb clearly took out 20 or so houses on each side of the road at the Common end – plenty of evidence in Battersea at just how bad the Luftwaffe was at hitting Clapham Junction station.
In the 50s and 60s Battersea Borough Council built some pleasant and ordinary council houses, all gone right to buy, and a small 2 storey block of 6 flats. When Wandsworth Council (as it had now become) went Tory in 1978 they started an aggressive sales policy – by aggressive I mean that rather than just sell when a tenant expressed interest the Council ran sales fairs, gave prizes for landmark sales – the thousandth, etc. – and generally did their level best to stimulate sales.
79 Sister’s Avenue was the first of the block of flats to be sold in 1983 for £13,500. By January, 1989, all six flats had been sold at an average price of £17,950. Good luck you will say to then residents. Wandsworth had created 6 new affordable units for sale and resale – bully for Right-to-Buy and Tory policies.
By 2007 Robinwood Ltd, a property developer was sniffing around. The developer clearly saw an opportunity to increase the asset value. 2007 was a busy year and by the end of it all six flats were owned by Robinwood having bought them from the owners at an average price of £315,000 (NB for accuracy it should be noted that I do not know the price of one of the flats and so this is an average for 5 but there is no reason to think that the sixth would be substantially different).
Robinwood, or their agents, put in a planning application to build six large town houses. These six have just been completed and are on the market with Savills, the top people’s estate agency and the prices vary from £1.725 million to £1.925 million – checked out with Savills today, 13/3/13.
In 30 years we have gone from having 6 council owned flats, which by any standard would have been affordable at a rent of £20 per week (WBC average rent in 1983 was £20.12), to genuinely affordable private flats and now to luxury housing at nearly £2 million a shot.
The strange irony of this is that this tale works for both Tory and Labour Partys. For people of my persuasion it highlights the terrible divisions between the rich and the rest (the people living there were not the really poor) and what Tories have allowed to happen to the stock of affordable housing. It highlights the brutal callousness of Wandsworth Tories and displays why they are so contemptible in the eyes of many on the left.
For Tories it has helped to improve the Wandsworth environment ensuring that the rest of the housing in Sisters, and Battersea in general, continues on an upward curve; it has improved the housing stock; it has made Wandsworth a better place to live in. It highlights the head in the sand, conservative (small c) nature of Labour members.
Matching up these completely disparate views of life is the stuff of political controversy.











