23 feb – 6pm- council cuts budget vote- demonstate, protest & lobby!
- Thread starter One_Stop_Shop
- Start date
ajdown
Posting in this thread
You got a brief mention on the BBC news: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12558702
I've been the opposite, just found out about whats been happening in Libya now!
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
good pics everyone, well done people 
buddha belly
New Member
I was one of the first 5 to get through security to the public gallery and spent the whole time loving the vibe, until the rest of the guys came into the floor after we had protested and cleared the hall for 20mins or so. The police blocked our exit and we spent the night listening to various Union starlets tell us how great the whole thing was and what a union victory it was. I saw no union rep etc figghting to get in or demand everyone was allowed in. I saw union reps lecture us on how great their victory was. I am a Unison memeber and was ashamed of how my representative conducted himself. Great night for the people role on the 26th, then role on the 27th when the union speeches begin 
Urbanblues
Was that it, life?
I got there about 6 pm. Managed to speak. Jon Rogers asked if I wanted to go in as a rep for disabled people; but, like you Belushi I was so knackered I had to decline. I ended up leaving about 7.15 pm. Oh well; I was present the last time we chased the fuckers out of the chamber about 4 years ago. Happy days...actually, very worrying days!
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
Plumdaff
joy in people
Many of the people from the occupation found themselves in the Brixton Bar and Grill later this evening where Lambeth Labour Councillors appeared to be cheerily having some kind of celebration, indeed some of them danced. Bit odd after voting through such an appalling budget for the people of their borough, no?
bluestreak
HomosexualityIsStalin’sAtomBombtoDestroyAmerica
was just on the news. steve reed said that it was unfair and lambeth bore a disproportionate amount of cus, ut they did need to set a legal budget. nobber.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
he is a fucking wanker.
did you throw things?
Mrs Magpie
On a bit of break...
gaijingirl
Well-Known Member
Those kids talking about their playground were amazing.
Away right now but I wish I had been there... I'm gutted and astonished at this whole thing... BBC article also good. WTF... councillors dancing the night away? Shame on them.
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
When the Cllr's moved to the security of the Assembly Hall, Mr Mayor ruled that only five speeches could be heard - two from Labour, two from the LibDems and one from the Tories. Independent Labour Cllr Abrams of Vassall ward was gagged, as were the deputations who wanted to speak out against the cuts.
Some of the speeches are now emerging. Cllr Reed has posted up his speech in full over on his blog. It fits in with his usual theme of addressing his pathalogical hatred of LibDems, rather than attempting to justify the savage cuts his Nu Labour administration is making.
Nu Labour's Cllr Edbrooke of Oval ward was keen to make her maiden speech (what - nine months claiming an allownace, and still yet to speak in the chamber?) No worries - her words of banality are up on the Nu Labour Oval blog.
And then we come to Cllr Abrams - given a six month suspension from the party for speaking out against the budget. Here is the speech he wanted, but was not allowed, to deliver:
********
Mr. Mayor, at the end of my speech at the 7th February Cabinet meeting the Leader of the Council turned towards me (face red with anger) and called me a ‘disgrace’.
Yet on the 15th February the Leader of the Council was found guilty of breaking the Council’s Code of Conduct – and gets no sanctions!!
I oppose the cuts and I get thrown out of the Labour Group
Now, who is the bigger ‘disgrace, me for opposing the cuts budget or the Leader of the Council for using Confidential Information to attack a former Councillor on his blog and twitter sites?
Mr. Mayor, we need a unity of purpose to oppose the ConDem Government cuts:
* The Government did not have to cut so deep and so fast in order to deal with the deficit. :
* This is clearly an ideological attack on working people
* £81b taken from the public sector as the bankers walk off with their bonuses
In the diverse Borough of Lambeth:
* Nearly £40m cuts this year and £90m over the next four years
* I represent one of the poorest wards in London, we cannot afford to lose any services.
This year alone in Lambeth:
* The youth service cut by over 1m
* Libraries axed
* The voluntary sector butchered
* Park Wardens sacked
* Street cleaning reduced
* Over 1,000 staff will be sacked over the next three years.
Tony Woodley of Unite the Union once said:
‘If you decide not to fight you will most certainly lose; but if you decide to fight back you stand a good chance of winning’.
Will Lambeth Council lead the fight back against the ConDem cuts?
Nothing is going to change unless we take a stand.
Lambeth should be setting a NEEDS budget, not carrying out £37m cuts in jobs and services.
Hence I CANNOT support the budget this evening.
********
And here is the speech that a member of the public wanting to defend the Park Rangers was also not allowed to deliver:
********
* I speak for Lambeth Parks and Green Spaces Forum to urge the Council to retain the Park Ranger Service. I also submit 3000 petitions.
* Our parks are the lungs of Lambeth – and the rangers are their front-line guardians. Don't get rid of them.
* There are two sides to what rangers do: Negatively, they stop or deter crime, the number one priority for Lambeth residents. Positively, rangers enhance the educational and healthy aspects of parks.
* This is not about the loss of a dozen jobs – this is about the loss of ordered, safe, welcoming parks to their users. Are you seriously saying you don't want security in Parks? Are you seriously saying volunteers can provide it? It is a quasi-police role to deal with rough drinkers, vandals, drug-takers, even BBQ-holders and inconsiderate dog-owners. Full-time, trained rangers can do this. Volunteers cannot.
This is a flawed decision: there was no prior consultation; no costing of downsides, such as vandalism and crime; the cut is arbitrary in that it is not in the context of a transparent management plan for Lambeth parks.
You say you want to be a cooperative council – well, cooperate with us: set up a broad-based working party, to report back in three months. Ask it to do a rigorous analysis of what Park users need.
The Parks Forum urges you to think again; so do 3000 petitioners; so does local MP, Tessa Jowell, who wrote on Monday to Cllrs Steve Reed and Florence Nosegbe, saying, “I do hope you could consider alternative solutions that will allow this valuable service to be maintained”.
There is an overwhelming case for retaining the Park Ranger Service.
Thank you.
********
Some of the speeches are now emerging. Cllr Reed has posted up his speech in full over on his blog. It fits in with his usual theme of addressing his pathalogical hatred of LibDems, rather than attempting to justify the savage cuts his Nu Labour administration is making.
Nu Labour's Cllr Edbrooke of Oval ward was keen to make her maiden speech (what - nine months claiming an allownace, and still yet to speak in the chamber?) No worries - her words of banality are up on the Nu Labour Oval blog.
And then we come to Cllr Abrams - given a six month suspension from the party for speaking out against the budget. Here is the speech he wanted, but was not allowed, to deliver:
********
Mr. Mayor, at the end of my speech at the 7th February Cabinet meeting the Leader of the Council turned towards me (face red with anger) and called me a ‘disgrace’.
Yet on the 15th February the Leader of the Council was found guilty of breaking the Council’s Code of Conduct – and gets no sanctions!!
I oppose the cuts and I get thrown out of the Labour Group
Now, who is the bigger ‘disgrace, me for opposing the cuts budget or the Leader of the Council for using Confidential Information to attack a former Councillor on his blog and twitter sites?
Mr. Mayor, we need a unity of purpose to oppose the ConDem Government cuts:
* The Government did not have to cut so deep and so fast in order to deal with the deficit. :
* This is clearly an ideological attack on working people
* £81b taken from the public sector as the bankers walk off with their bonuses
In the diverse Borough of Lambeth:
* Nearly £40m cuts this year and £90m over the next four years
* I represent one of the poorest wards in London, we cannot afford to lose any services.
This year alone in Lambeth:
* The youth service cut by over 1m
* Libraries axed
* The voluntary sector butchered
* Park Wardens sacked
* Street cleaning reduced
* Over 1,000 staff will be sacked over the next three years.
Tony Woodley of Unite the Union once said:
‘If you decide not to fight you will most certainly lose; but if you decide to fight back you stand a good chance of winning’.
Will Lambeth Council lead the fight back against the ConDem cuts?
Nothing is going to change unless we take a stand.
Lambeth should be setting a NEEDS budget, not carrying out £37m cuts in jobs and services.
Hence I CANNOT support the budget this evening.
********
And here is the speech that a member of the public wanting to defend the Park Rangers was also not allowed to deliver:
********
* I speak for Lambeth Parks and Green Spaces Forum to urge the Council to retain the Park Ranger Service. I also submit 3000 petitions.
* Our parks are the lungs of Lambeth – and the rangers are their front-line guardians. Don't get rid of them.
* There are two sides to what rangers do: Negatively, they stop or deter crime, the number one priority for Lambeth residents. Positively, rangers enhance the educational and healthy aspects of parks.
* This is not about the loss of a dozen jobs – this is about the loss of ordered, safe, welcoming parks to their users. Are you seriously saying you don't want security in Parks? Are you seriously saying volunteers can provide it? It is a quasi-police role to deal with rough drinkers, vandals, drug-takers, even BBQ-holders and inconsiderate dog-owners. Full-time, trained rangers can do this. Volunteers cannot.
This is a flawed decision: there was no prior consultation; no costing of downsides, such as vandalism and crime; the cut is arbitrary in that it is not in the context of a transparent management plan for Lambeth parks.
You say you want to be a cooperative council – well, cooperate with us: set up a broad-based working party, to report back in three months. Ask it to do a rigorous analysis of what Park users need.
The Parks Forum urges you to think again; so do 3000 petitioners; so does local MP, Tessa Jowell, who wrote on Monday to Cllrs Steve Reed and Florence Nosegbe, saying, “I do hope you could consider alternative solutions that will allow this valuable service to be maintained”.
There is an overwhelming case for retaining the Park Ranger Service.
Thank you.
********
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
Cllr Edbrooke states on her blog:
"I am so pleased that only £1 million of the £37 million of cuts this year has resulted in straight cuts to services."
According to this FOI request, 68 staff members receive a salary of £60k or more. Assuming that £60k is the minimun (which it isn't - we all now that the Chief Exec trousers just under £200k) then that is a salary of over £4m alone on these 68 staff members.
It put's Cllr Edbrooke's claim of being "pleased" that only £1m has been cut from frontline services into perspective.
Ms T
Honey-coloured ramparts
And no doubt quite a lot of those people are being sacked and they're all on a pay freeze. I just don't think it's that simple.
editor
hiraethified
They've got the choice not to pay their CEO 270k per year and to not pay themselves astronomical allowances.
http://lambethsaveourservices.org/2...il-cuts-budget-vote-demonstate-protest-lobby/
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
And here's Nu Labour's Cllr Bigham, writing his own Stockwell history:
********
When the history of this borough is written, those who chronicle it may draw comparisons between the events of today and those that faced the leadership of Lambeth in the 1980s.
In the face of the government of Mrs Thatcher, who at least had the honesty to say she didn’t believe in society, the party of Ted Knight entered into an exercise in political grandstanding, which saw Lambeth get surcharged and become the basket case of local government.
Faced with the same kind of onslaught from Mr Pickles, this Labour council has made a different choice. Despite having our budget slashed by a third, we will protect the services that matter most, defend the most vulnerable residents and cut out waste and inefficiency wherever we find it. That is what I mean by responsible leadership.
So instead of simply passing the cuts on, we have saved more than £24 million by reducing back office staff. Of course, these are not pain free – and it is right that we pay tribute to the staff in Lambeth who are going through a period of uncertainty and fear.
The Conservative led government has made much of the fact that – to borrow a phrase from Thatcher, that there is no alternative. But is that true? Is it economic sense, or misplaced ideology to want to pare down the deficit over 4 years rather than 8? Would you want to pay off your mortgage in 15 years or 30, if it meant you couldn’t afford to pay for the other necessities in your life?
And if these cuts aren’t ideological, why is it in London, that boroughs like Lambeth, Tower Hamlets and Hackney have the highest levels of cuts while boroughs like Harrow, Kensington & Chelsea and Richmond upon Thames have the lowest. This government has hit the most deprived and vulnerable communities hardest.
And what about the Lib Dems? Their leader in Lambeth, Cllr Lumsden has frankly, failed to meet his responsibilities. He had the chance to sign a letter condemning the cuts along with his fellow Lib Dem council leads and failed to do so.
Instead, he has been travelling round to other councils, giving a presentation saying “do not be a constructive opposition” and when speaking about cuts in local services says “it is not our problem”. He urges his colleagues to be opportunistic and set traps for councils. That’s the kind of leadership we’ve come to expect from his party.
Labour is prepared to support this government where it is right – in its attempt to make public services work better for communities or to help people to break the cycle of worklessness. But we cannot support the kind of proposals the Lib Dems are advocating tonight.
Labour has put together a balanced and structurally sound budget. Where possible we have used funds from the balance sheet to protect frontline services. By contrast, the Lib Dems have conducted a smash and grab raid on our reserves - funds which must be protected by law. Lambeth's Section 151 financial officer - a non party figure said this was financially risky.
The last time the Lib Dems were in power they left Lambeth in financial chaos - with no reserves, a 40 per cent tax hike and cuts to key services. This is what would happen if they had the chance to put in place this set of proposals which only add up to poor financial management.
We have acted to protect services. While the government has taken away 1 pound in every 3 from our budget, we will focus resources on the frontline, so we can increase the number of neighbourhood police, protect street cleaning services, build new leisure facilities across the borough and maintain key services like children’s social care. All while freezing council tax.
That is a responsible budget, that responds to our residents needs and protects our most vulnerable communities.
********
When the history of this borough is written, those who chronicle it may draw comparisons between the events of today and those that faced the leadership of Lambeth in the 1980s.
In the face of the government of Mrs Thatcher, who at least had the honesty to say she didn’t believe in society, the party of Ted Knight entered into an exercise in political grandstanding, which saw Lambeth get surcharged and become the basket case of local government.
Faced with the same kind of onslaught from Mr Pickles, this Labour council has made a different choice. Despite having our budget slashed by a third, we will protect the services that matter most, defend the most vulnerable residents and cut out waste and inefficiency wherever we find it. That is what I mean by responsible leadership.
So instead of simply passing the cuts on, we have saved more than £24 million by reducing back office staff. Of course, these are not pain free – and it is right that we pay tribute to the staff in Lambeth who are going through a period of uncertainty and fear.
The Conservative led government has made much of the fact that – to borrow a phrase from Thatcher, that there is no alternative. But is that true? Is it economic sense, or misplaced ideology to want to pare down the deficit over 4 years rather than 8? Would you want to pay off your mortgage in 15 years or 30, if it meant you couldn’t afford to pay for the other necessities in your life?
And if these cuts aren’t ideological, why is it in London, that boroughs like Lambeth, Tower Hamlets and Hackney have the highest levels of cuts while boroughs like Harrow, Kensington & Chelsea and Richmond upon Thames have the lowest. This government has hit the most deprived and vulnerable communities hardest.
And what about the Lib Dems? Their leader in Lambeth, Cllr Lumsden has frankly, failed to meet his responsibilities. He had the chance to sign a letter condemning the cuts along with his fellow Lib Dem council leads and failed to do so.
Instead, he has been travelling round to other councils, giving a presentation saying “do not be a constructive opposition” and when speaking about cuts in local services says “it is not our problem”. He urges his colleagues to be opportunistic and set traps for councils. That’s the kind of leadership we’ve come to expect from his party.
Labour is prepared to support this government where it is right – in its attempt to make public services work better for communities or to help people to break the cycle of worklessness. But we cannot support the kind of proposals the Lib Dems are advocating tonight.
Labour has put together a balanced and structurally sound budget. Where possible we have used funds from the balance sheet to protect frontline services. By contrast, the Lib Dems have conducted a smash and grab raid on our reserves - funds which must be protected by law. Lambeth's Section 151 financial officer - a non party figure said this was financially risky.
The last time the Lib Dems were in power they left Lambeth in financial chaos - with no reserves, a 40 per cent tax hike and cuts to key services. This is what would happen if they had the chance to put in place this set of proposals which only add up to poor financial management.
We have acted to protect services. While the government has taken away 1 pound in every 3 from our budget, we will focus resources on the frontline, so we can increase the number of neighbourhood police, protect street cleaning services, build new leisure facilities across the borough and maintain key services like children’s social care. All while freezing council tax.
That is a responsible budget, that responds to our residents needs and protects our most vulnerable communities.
Ms T
Honey-coloured ramparts
Perhaps, but cutting that salary down isn't going to make a huge amount of difference when you've got to save £37 million. The government is forcing councils to choose - libraries or old people's homes. Street cleaning or adult social care. It's totally shit.
A friend of mine used to be a councillor and it's bloody hard work. If they didn't get paid, who would do it?
Streatham_Mao
Active Member
Steve Reed isn't any better.
This is the speech I gave at the Council’s budget-setting meeting last night. The meeting was held in private after a group of protesters – some of them genuinely concerned residents, but some of them left-wing agitators – stormed the council chamber. I do, of course, share people’s anger over the Government-imposed cuts, but I do not condone behaviour that disrupts the democratic process. Deputations of residents who turned up were denied the chance to speak, and councillors were denied the chance to explain how we have protected frontline services from Government-imposed funding cuts. Because I wasn’t able to give the speech in public I am publishing it here.
—
Before the General Election Nick Clegg said cutting public spending too early would risk “pulling out the carpet from under the feet” of the British economy.
Speaking about early cuts he said “merrily slashing now is an act of economic masochism. If any party had to rely on our support and we were involved in government, of course we would say no.”
But he didn’t say no. He said yes.
He also said yes to breaking his pledge on tuition fees, breaking his pledge not to raise VAT, breaking his pledge to stop all bankers’ bonuses for two years.
All those Lib Dem leaflets we saw in Lambeth, not one of them said they were going to cut 70% off housing repairs, or 60% off rebuilding schools, or end secure tenancies, or treble rents, or cut one in every three pounds this council has to spend.
I have little doubt those decisions will rebound on the Liberal Democrats. But far more importantly, they will cause real pain to people living up and down this borough.
You can argue all you like about who caused this situation – the previous Government, or a global banking crisis that hit every major industrialised economy in the Western World. They talk today about overspending, but when the Tories and Liberals ran this council they used to complain that their funding increases weren’t big enough, they never once complained there was too much spending. But wherever you stand, is it fair for this Tory-led Government to pay down the debt by targeting the poorest people in the poorest parts of our country? Places like Lambeth?
This council will do whatever we can to protect the most vulnerable people in our borough from these Tory-Lib Dem cuts. But there will be no going back to the 1980s, no illegal budgets. That failed in the past. We won’t run up the white flag by refusing to set a budget and let Eric Pickles send in his administrators to make far deeper cuts that would hit people in this borough even harder.
Instead we will set a budget that seeks to protect the most vulnerable, keep people safe, and invest in better homes, better schools and help to get people back to work.
Above all, we will cut costs before cutting services. That’s why, despite a £37m funding reduction from the Govt this year, only £1m services face closure. That’s £1m too much, but the fact it’s not far worse is because this council has protected the front line.
I understand and I share people’s anger. But this council will behave responsibly because that is the best way to protect as many services and as many people as possible.
This is not a budget we wanted, but it is the best we can do in these dreadful circumstances that have their origin far beyond Lambeth town hall.
This is the speech I gave at the Council’s budget-setting meeting last night. The meeting was held in private after a group of protesters – some of them genuinely concerned residents, but some of them left-wing agitators – stormed the council chamber. I do, of course, share people’s anger over the Government-imposed cuts, but I do not condone behaviour that disrupts the democratic process. Deputations of residents who turned up were denied the chance to speak, and councillors were denied the chance to explain how we have protected frontline services from Government-imposed funding cuts. Because I wasn’t able to give the speech in public I am publishing it here.
—
Before the General Election Nick Clegg said cutting public spending too early would risk “pulling out the carpet from under the feet” of the British economy.
Speaking about early cuts he said “merrily slashing now is an act of economic masochism. If any party had to rely on our support and we were involved in government, of course we would say no.”
But he didn’t say no. He said yes.
He also said yes to breaking his pledge on tuition fees, breaking his pledge not to raise VAT, breaking his pledge to stop all bankers’ bonuses for two years.
All those Lib Dem leaflets we saw in Lambeth, not one of them said they were going to cut 70% off housing repairs, or 60% off rebuilding schools, or end secure tenancies, or treble rents, or cut one in every three pounds this council has to spend.
I have little doubt those decisions will rebound on the Liberal Democrats. But far more importantly, they will cause real pain to people living up and down this borough.
You can argue all you like about who caused this situation – the previous Government, or a global banking crisis that hit every major industrialised economy in the Western World. They talk today about overspending, but when the Tories and Liberals ran this council they used to complain that their funding increases weren’t big enough, they never once complained there was too much spending. But wherever you stand, is it fair for this Tory-led Government to pay down the debt by targeting the poorest people in the poorest parts of our country? Places like Lambeth?
This council will do whatever we can to protect the most vulnerable people in our borough from these Tory-Lib Dem cuts. But there will be no going back to the 1980s, no illegal budgets. That failed in the past. We won’t run up the white flag by refusing to set a budget and let Eric Pickles send in his administrators to make far deeper cuts that would hit people in this borough even harder.
Instead we will set a budget that seeks to protect the most vulnerable, keep people safe, and invest in better homes, better schools and help to get people back to work.
Above all, we will cut costs before cutting services. That’s why, despite a £37m funding reduction from the Govt this year, only £1m services face closure. That’s £1m too much, but the fact it’s not far worse is because this council has protected the front line.
I understand and I share people’s anger. But this council will behave responsibly because that is the best way to protect as many services and as many people as possible.
This is not a budget we wanted, but it is the best we can do in these dreadful circumstances that have their origin far beyond Lambeth town hall.
One_Stop_Shop
Well-Known Member
I think that's a bit unfair about union reps. They were in the forefront of things. I am in UNISON and disagreed with what the branch secretary said but to just put everyone in the same bracket isn't right.
One of the main organisations building for the demo was Lambeth SOS and there has been a really good input from the unions. Most of the people who spoke from the floor were just ordinary reps, hardly "union starlets".
Anyway that aside what a fantastic night!
One_Stop_Shop
Well-Known Member
Yes they have. If even a handful of Labour councils voted a no cuts budget through it would cause a political crisis.
Streatham_Mao
Active Member
Disturbingly, Reed is right about something: councils really have very little discretional power. By forcing councils to cut everything while claiming 'localism', the tories shift blame from themselves.
Of course, cllrs mostly seem willing to make cuts while passing the blame to central government.
One Lib Dem tweeted something about saving 500K by going open-source. Was going to ask him about that today - as a Linux fan I'd be behind it, but would like to see where the numbers come from.
Of course, cllrs mostly seem willing to make cuts while passing the blame to central government.
One Lib Dem tweeted something about saving 500K by going open-source. Was going to ask him about that today - as a Linux fan I'd be behind it, but would like to see where the numbers come from.
One_Stop_Shop
Well-Known Member
One example of the utter hypocricy of the Labour councillors is that Lambeth Living management requested that the concierge service be kept in house and the Labour councillors have just overuled them and said it had to be privatised. This puts them in a bracket of being more pro-privatisation than the senior management of the ALMO!
