The Londonwide Members of the London Assembly.

An unexpected pleasure of combining the local political and twitter battlegrounds has been the various tweetups that have been arranged by the ever resourceful members of the Croydon scene. These gatherings allow for a more informal atmosphere for people to meet each other for a chit-chat about whatever is going on in their lives or community at that time. Inevitably when I introduce myself with my twitter name of CroydonGreens a political discussion soon follows. Let’s be frank, that is why I’m there. To represent the Greens as an accessible political group and to dispel any lingering views that you have to be an extremist hippy to join up. It works in the opposite direction too. I have enjoyed the company of members of rival political parties and we can discuss issues honestly without the Punch-and-Judy style that is commonplace across the chamber floor of Croydon Council or on your twitterfeed. Long may what is said at tweetup stay at tweetup.

One discussion I did have, that I feel the need to follow up, was on the concept of the List system for electing additional members of the London Assembly. It was suggested to me that it was odd that certain members of the GLA did not have to answer to any particular area or electorate. That is technically true however it cannot be suggested that they do not represent anyone. For example, the 2 Green Assembly Members represent me. In theory it could be, and should be, argued that I am represented by the Croydon and Sutton GLA member, Conservative Steve O’Connell but that’s not really the case.

All politicians know which side their bread is butter on. Steve O’ Connell likes his bread buttered on both sides. *Let’s all take a moment to enjoy my cheap (although highly accurate) gag*. Most Croydonians reading this will be aware of Mr O’Connell’s work in his many jobs and will either admire him or despise him for it. Analysis of his record is not really the point of this post.

My point is this. Steve O’Connell does not need my vote to get elected; the colour of his rosette does that job for him. The same can be said of my MP, Malcolm Wicks and indeed my Ward Councillors. Therefore I cannot go to any of these people and expect to get any worthy response other than “I’ll see what I can do {now stop cluttering up my office}.”

The 9,000 people in Croydon and Sutton who voted for Shasha Khan at the 2008 GLA election would continue to feel this sense of disengagement if it were not for Jenny Jones and Darren Johnson fighting the good fight on their behalf. OK, since then we have managed to get our first MP elected but, let’s face it, the FPTP system used in Local and Parliamentary elections are always going to be more of a hindrance, than a help, to the Green Party cause.

The real allure of the upcoming elections in London is that it gives voters of other Parties who have an interest in green issues the ability to vote Green without having the guilt of turning their back their Parties' chosen candidate.

For example, a Conservative supporter can vote for Boris and Steve O’Connell and still give a vote to the Greens for the Assembly. I find there is a bit of snobbery within the Green Party at times when it comes to the values of those who vote Conservative. I find that many of those people hold deep concerns about the environment, it’s just not their number one issue and their worries are not being adequately met by their Party leaders. These are potential votes that deserve more than to be dismissed.

This is even more true for a Labour supporter who vote for Jenny Jones first and Ken Livingstone second in the mayoral election, knowing their vote will be counted for Ken when the big two slug it out for the role of Mayor; They can then vote for Louisa Woodley and round it off by ticking the Green Party on the Assembly list.

It is worth noting that all 3 LibDem members plus 3 more Conservative and 2 more Labour members are elected using the system, so it’s not as if this method penalises the bigger parties in any way. Curious that this structure is being used, without any of the bitter commotion that surrounded the AV disaster this time last year.

But that’s a different story.

Croydon Council Meetings. An attempt at an impartial review.

Mob mentality is a big news story at the moment. What happens to so many people which makes them act in a manner which would be abhorrent to all but the most base of that group. Mob mentality is feared with good reason. You can't reason with a mob.

I've experienced it myself when watching football matches. Your player crudely takes out an opponent and your first reaction is to think "ooh, he meant that, that's not good". You feel ashamed that this player is representing you and 'your mob'. The ref whips out the red card and immediately you start to boo. Why? Is it because everyone else is doing it? Is it because you're afraid of appearing to be disloyal? Is it because your afraid of the consequences?

Well, yes it is. Hold that thought.

The last Council meeting I attending had a running Twitter football-esque commentary from a former MP. I quite enjoyed it, to be honest, although it may not have quite lived up to the standards of BBC neutrality. To continue the football analogy somewhat, it was clear that this game was not being played on a level field. One team had more players than the other and, irrespective of the efforts of every player, the outcome had already been decided. I understand this is based on election results but why bother having an opposition when no Conservative Councillor will ever vote against his party because of the mob mentality described above. I debated with myself over the merits of a secret ballot voting system but then we could never trust the word of a councillor [insert your own joke here] as we would never know if they had voted in line with their public position.

The vote on the 54 story Menta Tower catastrophe provides an excellent example of the problem. 11 members on the Committee, 6 Conservative and 5 Labour. This imbalance guaranteed the planning application would be passed despite impassioned pleas against it from the local Conservative MP and other prominent Conservative Councillors. My colleagues and I cynically disgust discussed the likelihood that, with the outcome predetermined, the Conservatives mentioned could appear to be on the side of the public opposition while still pandering to the business interest who are set to make a killing. Now, we may be wrong in our cynicism or we may be right but it does seem like a convenient truth.

Anyway, back to the meeting analysis. The next time I hear the phrase "...unlike the party opposite..." I may well scream. As for Councillors standing up to ask "Does the Leader of the Council agree with me that everything is better now that we're in charge?" What on earth is the point of that? It's just a waste of everyones' time. I may also point out that if the leader of the Conservatives slaps his Labour counterpart for huge percentage rises in council tax he must then undo those hikes to avoid looking like a hypocrite. For example, a Conservative 0% increases which comes the year after a 26% Labour increase is still 2 years of higher taxes for the public and extra expenditure for the Council. You can't have it both ways.

The follow up questions from the public gallery (to the Councillors answers of previously submitted written questions) are allotted about 15 Min's which is too short when you listen to the rubbish which arrives soon after (and I'm not just talking about the 'follow up' answers). Later, some questions from Councillors deserved some respectable discussion, but most were just trying to impress their own party leader. Even the debates usually have some valid arguments on both sides if you can stay awake to listen. Of course the debates are doomed to the fate of the predetermined vote which is another waste of time.

So what to do?

Well, I can only foresee two situations which would lead to a better Council make up. A couple/handful of single issue candidates or Resident Associations representatives would help clear some of frankly embarrassing exchanges which we are forced to endure.
The other option is one I've heard about from Brighton. Apparently each Green Party Councillor is allowed to vote on each issue as they see fit. How refreshing!
But then I would say that, wouldn't I?
I'm biased.

The David Lean Cinema now showing more than meets the eye.

The poster for Croydon Council's new policy on art house cinema seems convincing enough at first.


Attack of the Killer Costs - Escape to Fairfield Halls.


It promises a thrilling ride where our councillors, faced with an onslaught of unstable balance sheets, come up with a brilliant scheme to rescue the cash flow and bring the prized movie reel back to the cheering crowds. Of course it's all a work of fiction.

The opening scenes show an elderly couple, bathed in sunshine, meeting up with friends to spend some time enjoying their retirement, well earned from a lifetime of honest endeavour. The purpose built theatre welcomes them in to a sanctuary well away from the smelly popcorn and unappealing blockbusters of the local VUE cinema which is aiming at a very different market. "Good job I don't want to see any of those films" remarks one "I'd never get up the steps!" But as they chuckle their way into the Clocktower the camera zooms in showing a sinister group watching bitterly in the wings.

"I want it for MYSELF!" screams Fairfield Hall director Jon Rouse as he slams his fist onto the table. "But Massster, you are the CEO of Croydon Council, you can do whatever you want. After all you have already shut nearly all the arts in the borough while swiping £1.5million of public money for us" his minions try to appease him. "Oh yes, haven't I just." The memory pleases him for a moment, but not for long." It's no good, those bloody bloggers are starting to smell a rat. You'll have to do it. Just wait till I'm gone." "Yes Massster" Sara's eyes turned hard. As cabinet member for customer services, culture and sport, she loved shutting down public services, even if it cost money instead of saving it. "This'll be just like the libraries, that was great fun and I'll get myself all over the papers again. No such thing as bad publicity. Voters usually vote for names they recognise, and they'll remember me for years. God, I love power." It had been another great day.

Sara's plans were soon in place to discourage visitors. Shut on Sundays, shut on Tuesday evenings, poor website, reduced advertising, reduced mailing lists. They could claim to be reducing costs even though the running of the Clocktower would still have to be paid despite the reduced income from shutting the cinema. David Lean - Croydon success story. Sara shuddered. "Hardly bears thinking about" she thought, "And now all these lovies coming out in support too. Ronnie Corbett. Julian Fellows. JULIAN BLOODY FELLOWS? A TORY LORD?. Still, I bet when push comes to shove he'll still vote for us rather than any of the others."

The only issue troubling Sara was the City Status bid. Who the hell would move into a city shutting down, or privatising, its art houses, libraries, care homes, etc. "I could say it was all for the Big Society" thought Sara, "that's the sort of meaningless drivel that can get you out of anything."

Just then the screen goes blank and our bemused pensioners are left sitting in the dark. Not for long, they are soon ushered outside. To a non-purposed built room, sometime in the future. "Trust us," says the Council, "we're doing this for your benefit. That's what we do here."

Always proud to serve. (Croydon Council motto)


Always proud to sever. (Croydon Council practice)