Motion Madness
Is it that councillors have so little to do that they are treating the council like a student union debating chamber? Debate is clearly important, but we are left with the impression that our current crop of councillors are more concerned with promoting their own virtuous credentials, or hearing their own voices, than they are with solving problems.
On the plus side, motions provide an opportunity for council members to become confident in expressing themselves in public. They can focus on questions that are of concern to the wider public, but not on the council agenda.
On the down-side, motions provide the perfect vehicle to promote the illusion of movement.
This is a quick run through of the motions scheduled for discussion at the last Labour Group meeting, and leaked to Open Newham.
Synopsis: Newham has one of the highest rates of religious observance in the country. We should celebrate this. End.
This really needs to be a motion?
We are clearly out of the loop here. What is a minoritized community?
This motion seems to take its lead from a campaign in the charity sector. Is there a problem in Newham Council that needs addressing? We should be told!
Is it a bit more virtue signalling? Probably.
Clearly, this is a round-Robin motion, probably supplied by the GMB, but it does highlight a real, if somewhat neglected problem. It seems to assume that changes can be made without cost. They can’t, but it will be positive if it does result in the increase in the number of public toilets, (spoiler alert: we’re not actually sure that it will).
This is a typical virtue signalling motion. It begins with generalised statements which are calculated to be widely approved. And then, without any logical link to suggest that the problem asserted has any basis in local facts, it goes on to assert that Newham needs to “ensure”, “facilitate”, “conduct” and “provide” a list of demands.
Unless they are actually asserting that Newham is failing in all of its legal duties, the motion is fatuous, whilst asserting virtue.
A real problem, dental caries in 5-9 year olds, becomes a vehicle for more virtue signalling and a pop at the Tories. Newham Public Health Department are already aware that dental caries is a major untreated issue in one community and located primarily in one geographical area of the borough. This group distorts the whole picture. They are aware because they commissioned research which showed this. Yet this motion makes no mention of the fact nor does it require any action on the matter from the mayor’s champion for Health, Cllr Ali. Shame really, because the issue might be alleviated significantly or even solved without the need for a single new dentist, if anyone was really bothered, that is.
This one does look like a bit of virtue signalling. Noting that “Martin’s Law” is likely to come into effect, it urges Newham to do what the Act requires.
We have discussed this one at greater length here. It is interesting to note that one of the mayor’s appointed cabinet members has co-sponsored this motion. It suggests that even those most ‘loyal’ to the mayor are actually not that loyal.
It seems that the mayors hostility towards ‘the barge’ in the Royal Docks is not supported by all of her colleagues. Again, a deputy cabinet member takes issue with the mayor.
This one is truly Orwellian and suggests that Labour in Newham have run headlong into the CRT rabbit hole.
It desires “to make anti-racism training and cultural competency training compulsory for all teachers across the Borough of Newham”. And to “ensure that Ofsted … starts to mark schools on: a. Racial literacy and Cultural competency of the teachers.”
We discuss this at greater length here. The movers point out that it took the mayor about one year to renege on her election promises on social housing.
If you ever needed an example of self-congratulatory virtue signalling, this is it. Let’s pat ourselves on the back because, err, we declared a “climate emergency”.
Note. Newham did nothing to remove the “dangerous toxins from the atmosphere” caused by aircraft engines, but that didn’t stop the movers of the motions from applauding themselves.
The grown-ups in the room (if there were any) will be aware that there are always compromises because of competing demands; industry provides jobs but it also pollutes. If you want the wealth that industry creates, there will be non-pecuniary costs. It would be easy to clean up the air around the Royal Docks, simply shut down the airport. That however, would affect both the Newham and the London economy.
As the American economist, Thomas Sowell noted, “there are no solutions, there are merely trade-offs”.
Still, Brayshaw and Adaja are both members in the Royal Docks area so they can put the motion on a leaflet and give the impression that they are actually doing something for their constituents.
The Corbynites show their opposition to human rights abuses, at least in those countries that are not run by left-wing dictators.
Although the context of this suggests debate as a competition of ideas, we have illustrated how Newham Council meetings are structured in such a way as to reduce debate.