A Bit of Light Relief Amidst Three Hours of Tedium
Councillors Whitworth and Onovo have been elevated to positions of greatness. Both were announced as cabinet members, though with what portfolios remains, as yet, a mystery. Their profiles on the Newham website have yet to be updated.
Newham Greens, with some schadenfreude we suspect, noted, (in Motion 1) that the mayor has been selective in the promises she has sought to keep.
They also seem to be a little too enamoured of the idea of rent controls. They are, of course, a little too young to remember what happened in the 1970s, and because no-one reads books anymore, they can’t be expected to know. Here is what Kristian Niemietz of the IEA said on the matter, in A Failed Idea that Never Dies.
“The issue with rent controls is not that they are novel or radical. The issue with them is just that every time they are tried, the results are exactly what the Economics 101 textbook would predict. They lead to a decline in the supply of rental properties, a decline in housebuilding rates, a slowdown in tenant mobility, a misallocation of existing properties, and a decline in the quality of rental housing.”
He continues, “they led to a steep decline in the size of the private rental sector”. Still, the purpose of motions is not to generate workable policy, as much as it is to display the mover’s political virtue.
Some interesting questions were raised by councillors, and indeed, some reflected concerns raised on these pages (see pp79-80)
Cllr Areeq Chowdhury caught himself in his own PC-equity trap, seeking to combat the climate emergency by sanctioning older cars without penalising “people on low incomes”, those wot drive old cars. One day it will become apparent that you can’t be both authoritarian and cuddly.
Cllr Kamali wanted to know what was being done to protect women from men. All men, it seems are the problem when it comes to murdering their partners. Alas, the only examples she could cite hailed from a small area in Asia. She might want to work harder to avoid accusations of some form of inverted racism.
Cllr Garfield challenged the Cabinet Member for Resources, who leads on HR matters (apparently) whether elected members are ‘employees’ within the meaning of employment legislation. It seems that they are not. This might have surprised some of the councillors present given that one elected member has embarked upon an employment tribunal case against the council of which she is not an employee.
One small chuckle was raised when Cllr McLean, the cabinet member for Resident Experience chose not to answer a question on council tax from Green councillor Nate Higgins, leaving her deputy, Cllr Easter to do so. Higgins noted the increases in council tax under the Fiaz administration, and correctly asserted that this regressive form of taxation hits those on low incomes hardest.
It did strike some members as odd that Cllr McLean seems to avoid anything that might take some effort or show that she was in command of her brief, leaving the response to the member for responsibility for Inter-faith dialogue to field the question on tax and poverty.
We have often raised the question of prostitution along the Romford Road and the failure of the mayor to address the issue. The mayor notably came into conflict with her then cabinet member for crime, leading to the latter’s resignation. At the same time the mayor promised to have a new policy ready by December, last year, (another unmet promise).
Cllr Paul, who represents part of the Romford Road asked the following of the cabinet member.
The Grinch duly responded. It seems that Newham does now have a strategy and it will be presented to the cabinet in January 2025, almost two years after Lee-Phakoe’s resignation.
Under the item reserved for speeches from members, opposition councillor, Mehmood Mirza, weighed in. He was sporting a very trendy kufiyah (keffiah), suitably amended to remove it from its Mesopotamian origins, (but as he’s neither Arab nor Levantine, does this mean that there are some forms of cultural appropriation that are now acceptable?). He assured Newham Labour that the Independents were planning to become the largest party on the council in 2026. Actually, he asserted that Newham Independents will win!
Our own view is that this is less, rather than more likely. However, he has made it clear that Newham Independents may have suffered a slight dent in their progress with the 2024 byelections, but they are here to stay, and they intend to fight.
It seems that Newham Labour will have a real battle on their hands come the next election, despite the manoeuvrings of the national party seeking to appease radical Muslim sentiment. Mirza’s biggest problem remains that the opposition vote remains split and as we noted earlier, a derisory 35% of the vote is likely to ensure victor for Labour.
