buddha belly
New Member
In the paperwork left behind was a section on his suspension from the council. So web if he wanted too he couldn't vote.
23 feb – 6pm- council cuts budget vote- demonstate, protest & lobby!
- Thread starter One_Stop_Shop
- Start date
In the paperwork left behind was a section on his suspension from the council. So web if he wanted too he couldn't vote.
He was suspended from the Labour Group but remains a councillor.
In the end for all Kingsley's bluster he abstained on the budget vote. It was a recorded vote so it will appear in the minutes.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
They have - refuse to implement the cuts,defy the govt.If ALL Labour councillors did this, the Condems would have to listen
Alternatively they could sell the office blocks that will be empty when they make 1,000 redundancies. So far Labour have refused.
Or they could have accepted anyone of a number of alternatives put last night - open source software was one saving £500,000 while savings from advertising would be another £300,000. Not enough to stop every cut but easily enough to save park rangers, crossing patrols, holdiay play schemes etc....
Minnie_the_Minx
someinenhhanding menbag and me ah bollox
I just saw you on BBC news Editor 
stevebradley
Well-Known Member
Last night's council meeting was a complete farce, for a number of reasons.
Firstly, it should have come as no surprise to the Mayor and the council's security that there would be attempts to disrupt the meeting. Yet they were completely incapable of planning for that eventuality in a way that ensured an open and accountable meeting could still be held. The Mayor also failed to respond to the genuine concerns of people in the public gallery that there were lots of empty seats in the members' gallery opposite. It understandably looked like the council was keeping seats empty and keeping protesters outside, when the reality was that those seats were empty as they were reserved for the people waiting outside the Chamber as the deputations. It would've been unfair to not let those who made the deputations stick around and hear the debate - hence they had reserved seats. But did the Mayor even try to explain this ? No. Instead he went into a bizarre rant at the protestors that they were "stopping democracy". Net result - democracy got stopped by having a meeting behind closed doors. A complete failure by the council - but maybe it served their purposes to have it that way ?
Secondly - although this point won't be popular amongst many on here, the 'occupation' proved self-defeating. It didn't stop the meeting, it didn't stop the cuts, and instead it meant that no protestors had their say via the deputations. It also meant that instead of all 58 councillors present having their say (incl Cllr Abrams, Jason - he wasn't "gagged" any different than the vast majority of cllrs were), speeches were reduced to 5 core cllrs. So no chance for 'ordinary' cllrs to have their say. It also meant that members of the public couldn't hear what each party and each cllr had to say. Most importantly, it meant the public couldn't see and hear Labour cllrs laughing throughout the voting and clapping when they got their cuts package pushed through at the end. The biggest disgrace of the night.
Thirdly - there ARE alternatives to the cuts being introduced in Lambeth which DON'T require an illegal budget to be set. But no-one had the chance to hear this argument as the meeting wasn't held in public. So yet again the myth persists from Labour that it's either their budget or an illegal one, when the truth is very very different.
So a bad night for Lambeth, for democracy and for debate. The public had the right to hear and see every cllr as they spoke and voted on this issue. But because the council conveniently couldn't manage a predictable situation, that opportunity was removed. Net results - the cuts got passed without the public debate there should have been. A farce that let Labour completely off the hook.
P.S. Despite an indefinite suspension from Labour and being able to vote, Cllr Abrams chose not to vote against the cuts.
Firstly, it should have come as no surprise to the Mayor and the council's security that there would be attempts to disrupt the meeting. Yet they were completely incapable of planning for that eventuality in a way that ensured an open and accountable meeting could still be held. The Mayor also failed to respond to the genuine concerns of people in the public gallery that there were lots of empty seats in the members' gallery opposite. It understandably looked like the council was keeping seats empty and keeping protesters outside, when the reality was that those seats were empty as they were reserved for the people waiting outside the Chamber as the deputations. It would've been unfair to not let those who made the deputations stick around and hear the debate - hence they had reserved seats. But did the Mayor even try to explain this ? No. Instead he went into a bizarre rant at the protestors that they were "stopping democracy". Net result - democracy got stopped by having a meeting behind closed doors. A complete failure by the council - but maybe it served their purposes to have it that way ?
Secondly - although this point won't be popular amongst many on here, the 'occupation' proved self-defeating. It didn't stop the meeting, it didn't stop the cuts, and instead it meant that no protestors had their say via the deputations. It also meant that instead of all 58 councillors present having their say (incl Cllr Abrams, Jason - he wasn't "gagged" any different than the vast majority of cllrs were), speeches were reduced to 5 core cllrs. So no chance for 'ordinary' cllrs to have their say. It also meant that members of the public couldn't hear what each party and each cllr had to say. Most importantly, it meant the public couldn't see and hear Labour cllrs laughing throughout the voting and clapping when they got their cuts package pushed through at the end. The biggest disgrace of the night.
Thirdly - there ARE alternatives to the cuts being introduced in Lambeth which DON'T require an illegal budget to be set. But no-one had the chance to hear this argument as the meeting wasn't held in public. So yet again the myth persists from Labour that it's either their budget or an illegal one, when the truth is very very different.
So a bad night for Lambeth, for democracy and for debate. The public had the right to hear and see every cllr as they spoke and voted on this issue. But because the council conveniently couldn't manage a predictable situation, that opportunity was removed. Net results - the cuts got passed without the public debate there should have been. A farce that let Labour completely off the hook.
P.S. Despite an indefinite suspension from Labour and being able to vote, Cllr Abrams chose not to vote against the cuts.
editor
hiraethified
The camera couldn't leave me alone!I just saw you on BBC news Editor
Minnie_the_Minx
someinenhhanding menbag and me ah bollox
Must be your rugged good looks *cough*
Have tried finding video but they seem to have trimmed it to 21 seconds. Maybe full version will appear on iplayer later
Streatham_Mao
Active Member
Cllr Mark Bennett's blog is up. Guess what line it takes.
TruXta
tired
Seems like a fair point that Cllr Bennett makes about the protests actually disrupting some of the deputations, leading to a much curtailed session? I'm not saying people shouldn't protest, but what exactly were they (you?) hoping to achieve by doing it like this? Feel free to set me straight if you think I'm way off the mark.
editor
hiraethified
How dare he dismiss residents in such a manner. I recognised a large chunk of the crowd and they were most certainly locals - many long term ones at that - but perhaps they weren't "genuine" enough for the disingenuous councillor.
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
Just to confirm - Cllr Steve Bradley is the one LibDem councillor for Vassall ward, the same patch as the Independent Cllr Abrams. I think if it came down to a choice, Cllr Abrams would begrudgingly send Cllr Reed a Christmas card, ahead of Cllr Bradley.
Blimey.
Blimey.
yellowslicker
New Member
Whoever is to blame for the cuts, it is rather disgusting that after agreeing a budget that will see hundreds of job losses and many services to local people cut, a number of Labour councillors decided to head straight to the Brixton Bar and Grill for a back-slapping drink up.
http://lambethsaveourservices.org/2...council-budget-and-storm-the-council-chamber/
http://lambethsaveourservices.org/2...council-budget-and-storm-the-council-chamber/
ericjarvis
give a feck for the feckless
They probably will, and it will be a complete load of bollocks.
What the Labour right refuse to admit is that for all his manifold faults, Knight's "gesture" led to the three Lambeth constituencies being almost the only ones outside of Liverpool to show an increase in the Labour vote in the following general election. I realise this simple fact is somewhat inconvenient for those who have decided to remodel the Labour Party into ToryPartyLite (tm), it doesn't stop it being true.
Lambeth is a borough where a hell of a lot of people are under a lot of pressure to simply survive. Some acceptance of that from our elected representatives would go a long way. Some sign that they are prepared to take on challenges on our behalf can produce some loyalty in return.
Instead we have a Labour group that consists almost entirely of people who are insulated comfortably enough from the problems that face most of their electorate that they can concentrate on posturing to appeal to the press and media rather than the people they are supposed to represent.
My recollection of the time immediately following the surcharging was that the council actually improved a little if anything. Some departments remained pretty lousy, but the level of corruption in the DLO was dramatically reduced at least for a while, and when it came to borough development an awful lot was done that has stood the test of time as genuine improvements to life in the borough.
The real farces didn't start until AFTER the Blairites emasculated the left in the Labour Party in Lambeth. A lot of competent and even talented councillors and potential councillors were sidelines in favour of party apparatchiks who could be relied on not to rock the boat. Oddly enough that's also when the people of Lambeth stopped reliably voting Labour. Of course that must be a coincidence, otherwise it would imply that the rewritten history of Lambeth in the late 80s might not be entirely true.
Streatham_Mao
Active Member
The deputations never got that far.
Here's the view from one deputation.
I'm not particularly impressed with the protests last night, because they've been used by Cllrs since as a reason to slip off. But then I'm also not impressed by how quickly an open meeting was dropped.
ericjarvis
give a feck for the feckless
Well yes they could. Sell office space during a low point in the property market when London has a vast surplus of office space. So that in some future time they can spend vast amounts more to buy new space at a time when office space is in short supply and property prices are high.
For God's sake that's taking lack of forethought to a level that the average crackhead would be ashamed of.
TruXta
tired
That certainly puts things in a different light. Cheers for the link.
Private Storm
Smell The Glove
That's not how I read that at all. In all he says "I’ve no doubt there were genuine local residents in the town hall last night. But the manner of the protest didn’t allow their voices to be heard by councillors, or councillors to be heard in return."
Don't see how that is dismissive to residents tbh.
editor
hiraethified
I think my hangover got the better of my reading skills there.
Streatham_Mao
Active Member
One_Stop_Shop
Well-Known Member
I have to say I don't know how Lib Dem councillors have the cheek to come on here and talk about the alternatives to the cuts when it is a Tory/Lib Dem government putting though the most savage cuts since WWII. Utter hypocrits.
It's a shame no-one in the meeting filmed them doing it with their phone, wouldn't have been hard. This combined with their knees up in the Bar & Grill, boozing and dancing the night away, shows how vile their attitude is.
Also the Labour councillors chose not to have deputations, it was entirely their choice not to.
Lastly I was down for one of the deputations and I think that although it is a good thing to do we know the Labour councillors would have listened and ignored. The publicity from the occupation and the chance to get more people involved in campaigns like Lambeth Save our Services to build more and more resistance far outweighs any negatives. Everyone knew the cuts were going through last night no matter what, we need a far stronger campaign involving strikes, occupations and direct action to stop this government and the cuts. At least last night can help go in that direction.
It's a shame no-one in the meeting filmed them doing it with their phone, wouldn't have been hard. This combined with their knees up in the Bar & Grill, boozing and dancing the night away, shows how vile their attitude is.
Also the Labour councillors chose not to have deputations, it was entirely their choice not to.
Lastly I was down for one of the deputations and I think that although it is a good thing to do we know the Labour councillors would have listened and ignored. The publicity from the occupation and the chance to get more people involved in campaigns like Lambeth Save our Services to build more and more resistance far outweighs any negatives. Everyone knew the cuts were going through last night no matter what, we need a far stronger campaign involving strikes, occupations and direct action to stop this government and the cuts. At least last night can help go in that direction.
stevebradley
Well-Known Member
Thanks Jason. As my login name shows, I'm making no attempt to hide who I am. I'm probably the only person on here who uses their real and full name to post. Hope all's well in your new home.
And I suspect I'd get a Chrimbo card off of Kingsley before his own Labour ward colleague in Vassall would.....
Ms T - I'll respond on the 'alternatives' to the councils package of cuts later this evening, as I have a few meetings first. Apologies.
EricJarvis - if you think a 'slimmed-down' Lambeth will go out and recruit dramatically more staff at some undefined future point, then I fear it's not the original poster who's deluded on that one. If you'd rather see office blocks sit empty for yet more years rather than a few libraries and one o'clock clubs stay open, then that's your choice - but it wouldn't be mine.
ericjarvis
give a feck for the feckless
So basically you are in favour of the council making permanent cuts. At least that clarifies the Lib Dem position a little from the current one of cuts must be made but any cuts made by Labour are wrong.
I also fail to see how it can be good value to the people of Lambeth to sell a building now if it's likely to fetch a far higher price a couple of years down the line. It may pay to keep a few things open for the next couple of years, but in the medium term it means losing large sums of money. Maybe you don't care because all that matters to you is what happens up to the next round of council elections, but some of us look at Lambeth as the place we expect to be living in for the next few decades.
I see your approach as epitomising the cheap and tawdry instant political gratification nonsense that has pretty much destroyed most people's faith in British politics. You don't give a damn about anything beyond the next election and barely care about anything beyond the next petty snipe.
Kutuzov
Active Member
Reminds me of the shameful night a few years back when Labour councillors voted down the holding of a specially requisitioned council meeting to discuss the more than doubling of home care charges for the elderly and disabled which they had brought in - and then spent the night drinking in the Fridge Bar while opposition councillors stayed in the council chamber discussing the devastating care charge hikes with members of the public, carers and voluntary sectory reps. All this after Steve Reed and his gang had more than doubled their Cabinet allowances.
Kutuzov
Active Member
The riverside office block you are talking about is now worth more than the council paid for it. The space is not needed. Selling it now would save having to make the cuts you are complaining about.
The reason Labour want to hold on to it is not the gamble that it may be worth more "a couple of years down the line" but the chance to flog it off just before the next election and then get reelected with a big cut in council tax to bribe the voters.
Streatham_Mao
Active Member
Weirdly, my handle is my full name. Which says a lot about my mother...
I personally think it's nice to see a Cllr here, under their own name and not doing a post-and-run. It's the sort of thing I want to see more of. Unless I've missed something and it happens all the time around here.
I've got mixed feelings about all this.
We elect people to make decisions for us, tax us, represent us. That's how grown-up democracies work.
But we should also take every opportunity to remind the people we elect: 1) that is where their power comes from 2) what we, the public, care about between elections 3) make a shit-storm when they promise to do things, but then later break those promises.
That means protesting, nudging etc. Democracy doesn't exist on one day every 4 years.
I fully expected the Lambeth cuts to go through (they really had little choice in the top-line figure, given what the coalition is handing down), but I thought the process should be as morally challenging to the councillors doing the deed as possible - mainly in the hope they might do some very hard thinking.
But that didn't happen.
Lambeth using security guards to block entrance to a (mostly empty) public gallery and trying to shoe people into a side-room is not 'democracy seen and done'.
They knew there would be demand and kept people out under the pretence of tickets.
But once the gallery was invaded though I wish people had kept quiet (after making a valid point to the mayor about empty seats).
It allowed the cabinet to avoid justifying their decisions in public (you should be able to see the whites of their eyes) and let the LibDems and Tories (whose parties are setting the actual level and timing of the cuts) avoid any responsibility for their actions.
I'm sure occupying the chamber was fun, but the flip side of that was that decisions that will effect all of us went through without any public scrutiny.
That's not a victory of any kind.
I can't help thinking that this is exactly what some of the councillors (from all parties) secretly wanted. (It was certainly a lot easier to get into the building that the last protest, and I'm pretty sure there was someone from the council ushering people into the building.)
Finally, the Labour council may have a difficult decision on cuts initiated by other parties (although would have had to faced a cut-down version of it had their own party won) they really need to present themselves as though they are enjoying a little bit less. Try being a bit penitent FFS.
The chance to slag off locals / mainstream left / far left personalities and organisations seems to have trumped any anger they had previously been able to muster against the Tories and LibDems.
Even then there is a sense that the anger a few deluded councillors managed to show in the press is really aimed at furthering the careers*
* For the period the meeting was open you could see in the faces of the councillors (of all parties) who felt they were there to make hard choices VS the obvious careerists.
We elect people to make decisions for us, tax us, represent us. That's how grown-up democracies work.
But we should also take every opportunity to remind the people we elect: 1) that is where their power comes from 2) what we, the public, care about between elections 3) make a shit-storm when they promise to do things, but then later break those promises.
That means protesting, nudging etc. Democracy doesn't exist on one day every 4 years.
I fully expected the Lambeth cuts to go through (they really had little choice in the top-line figure, given what the coalition is handing down), but I thought the process should be as morally challenging to the councillors doing the deed as possible - mainly in the hope they might do some very hard thinking.
But that didn't happen.
Lambeth using security guards to block entrance to a (mostly empty) public gallery and trying to shoe people into a side-room is not 'democracy seen and done'.
They knew there would be demand and kept people out under the pretence of tickets.
But once the gallery was invaded though I wish people had kept quiet (after making a valid point to the mayor about empty seats).
It allowed the cabinet to avoid justifying their decisions in public (you should be able to see the whites of their eyes) and let the LibDems and Tories (whose parties are setting the actual level and timing of the cuts) avoid any responsibility for their actions.
I'm sure occupying the chamber was fun, but the flip side of that was that decisions that will effect all of us went through without any public scrutiny.
That's not a victory of any kind.
I can't help thinking that this is exactly what some of the councillors (from all parties) secretly wanted. (It was certainly a lot easier to get into the building that the last protest, and I'm pretty sure there was someone from the council ushering people into the building.)
Finally, the Labour council may have a difficult decision on cuts initiated by other parties (although would have had to faced a cut-down version of it had their own party won) they really need to present themselves as though they are enjoying a little bit less. Try being a bit penitent FFS.
The chance to slag off locals / mainstream left / far left personalities and organisations seems to have trumped any anger they had previously been able to muster against the Tories and LibDems.
Even then there is a sense that the anger a few deluded councillors managed to show in the press is really aimed at furthering the careers*
* For the period the meeting was open you could see in the faces of the councillors (of all parties) who felt they were there to make hard choices VS the obvious careerists.
Mrs Magpie
On a bit of break...
Excellent post.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
to be fair, though, the council was simply going to rubberstamp the decision made by the cabinet a couple of weeks ago, which itself was rubberstamping decisions reached by the preponderance of the labour group before that.
