17 March - Higher taxes augmented by poor quality insults
Much later than hoped for, the promised report on last week’s Council meeting, although it could be argued that all
the exciting stuff has already been covered.
Council Leader Teresa O’Neill began with a pretty good summary of the difficulties facing the borough but marred somewhat by her ridiculous claim that
the Conservatives were “overwhelming re-elected” by residents last May when the truth is that they gained only 50·4% of the vote.
More money will be spent on road and footpath repairs (6,000 potholes fixed each year according to Cabinet
Member Leaf) but the shopping centres are still suffering from Covid and on-line shopping.
The Fair Funding Review (of Government grants to Councils) has been deferred beyond the next General Election.
Bexley will get £42·1 million this year while Greenwich will get £116·2 million
and this impacts badly on Bexleyְ’s Council Tax rate. The Mayor of London has
increased his precept by 9·74%. He delivers “less buses (sic), less money
for roads and less police for Bexley and plans to charge residents more to drive their cars”.
Khan did not mention an Outer London ULEZ in his Manifesto and residents are
angry. “Key workers in Care, Health, Education and Police” who live beyond
our borders “are actively considering whether they can afford to continue to deliver vital services”.
“ULEZ sends a very clear message, you can pollute the air if you can afford to do so.
It is good that our Labour MP agrees with us as do some Labour Councils.”
For Labour, Councillor Wendy Perfect, said that
she and her ward colleague Baljeet Gill had been working with Northumberland
Heath shop owners to support their high street and the issue upon which everyone agrees is the
need for an hour of free parking. “High parking charges are resented by residents
who may not have change or be able to use a card or work out how the machine works or what
to do when it doesn’t. Supermarkets do not provide free parking because of
altruism but because it encourages trade. Older people in particular are put off
of visiting high streets by these problems and the risks of cracked footpaths.”
(May I interject here by saying that my 52nd Amazon delivery of 2023 has just dropped on to my doormat?)
Leader Teresa O’Neill rejected all of Labour’s proposals without even a moment of consideration
and Cabinet Member Peter Craske, ignoring everything that Councillor Perfect had
said, came out with the nonsensical “Labour only wishes to run down our borough”.
Cabinet Member for Growth, Cafer Munur, said that Labour’s proposals were “a hash”
and Richard Diment (Education) said it was “a mismash”. Cabinet Member Leaf, as
you might expect, came out with a much longer series of gratuitous insults, of
which “clueless” was just one.
Councillor Mabel Ogundayo (Labour, Thamesmead East) said that the 2021 30% hike in
parking charges had contributed to the adverse effect on Council revenues and
the Conservative message is to “double down on those and increase them again.
Extension of CPZs and reviewing their hours of operation, more box junction
cameras and increased level of fines. We need more innovative ideas.”
Councillor Ogundayo made it very clear indeed that she supports extra taxation
on those who cannot afford to change their cars regularly.
Councillor Kurtis Christoforides (Conservative, St. Mary’s & St. James), with a degree of honesty that will get him into trouble,
said that he recognised that “Labourְ’s objectives were reasonable and should garner
cross-party support in isolation”. ULEZ excepted.
His ward colleague Cameron Smith was similarly able to see some merit in the
Labour amendment, particularly regarding car parking charges but like Councillor
Christoforides would not offer his support for it. Cameron produced some interesting ULEZ data
from the Mayor’s own report. The impact on trade in Bexleyheath alone is
estimated to be £800,000 a year as shoppers stay away. Eternal optimist Smith
hoped that Labour Members would use their influence on Sadiq Khan to benefit Bexley residents.
Cabinet Members Read and Seymour both said that ULEZ would have a devastating
effect on care workers with so many of them living beyond the border with Kent.
Bexley will notice when their services become unavailable.
Leader O’Neill summed up the debate with “Labour is once again talking down our
borough, what a shame” and returned to her “overwhelmingly” claptrap. On firmer
ground she ridiculed Labour’s pro-ULEZ stance while their MP Abena
Oppong-Asare had more sense.
The Labour Amendment was rejected along party lines and the Conservative
proposal to increase Council Tax by the maximum permissible by law was accepted. 100% along party lines again.