Posts

Complaint upheld: Cllrs Eglin, Ihenachor, Imre, and Malik found not to have declared their interests, and LBWF drops links to councillors’ party political websites

A recent post (see link, below) recorded that (a) Cllrs Rhiannon Eglin, Chrystal Ihenachor, Sazimet-Palta Imre, and Zafran Malik had not declared their interests, and (b) several other councillors, including Clyde Loakes, were using their profile pages on the LBWF website to link to Twitter feeds that were blatantly partisan, in contravention of the 1986 Local Government Act’s clear instruction that ‘A local authority shall not publish any material which, in whole or in part, appears to be designed to affect public support for a political party’. Happily, a complaint to LBWF about these matters now has been fully upheld, with changes allegedly made to prevent a repeat. On the declaratio... »

Is LBWF involved in covering up the danger that Town Hall asbestos has posed to its staff and contractors?

This blog is highly sceptical about conspiracy theories and allegations of cover ups. But sometimes the facts of a case are so striking that it is easy to see why even the most sober observers will judge such scepticism to be misplaced, indeed naive. Consider the following. First, the background. In 2015, the government’s Health and Safety Executive (HSE) successfully prosecuted LBWF for exposing staff and contractors to dangerous asbestos dust. Much of the evidence heard in the court case related to asbestos in the Town Hall basement. During the proceedings, and in attempted mitigation, LBWF CEO Martin Esom stated under oath: ‘As a result of…the HSE investigation, LBWF have deployed a signi... »

LBWF councillors’ Register of Interests sparks controversy… yet again

Over recent years, whenever anyone from outside the Town Hall examines councillors’ publicly declared interests – their jobs, landholding, membership of clubs and societies, etc. – it’s almost guaranteed that controversy will follow. Who can forget, for example, that, extraordinarily, the immediate predecessors of the present Leader, Chris Robbins and Clare Coghill, were both found to have made wrong and misleading declarations? And it seems as if this long-running saga continues, for this week there has been another dismal instalment. It should be emphasised that the term Register of Interests is something of a misnomer, as LBWF does not in fact publish all the councillors’ declared i... »

Why is LBWF so poor at delivering ‘affordable housing’, particularly genuinely ‘affordable housing’?

A previous post (see links below) examined LBWF’s recent performance over ‘affordable housing’ (AH). It noted that though the word ‘affordable’ is vague and often used confusingly, what’s referred to as AH in fact encompasses housing let at four different rent levels, two, called Social Rent and London Affordable Rent, specifically designed so as to be genuinely in reach of the less well off. And it went on to show that from 2012-13 to 2020-21, LBWF had fallen far short of its long-term and often stated promise that 50 percent of housing completions would be ‘affordable’; and, worse still, Social Rent and London Affordable Rent completions in Waltham Forest were a me... »

Looking back at the past, an occasional series. Part two: ‘Our Olympics – “Chariots of Ire”‘

Purely for amusement, and to compliment all the remeniscing prompted by the 2012 anniversary, here’s a post that first appeared on this blog in 2015, one of a series on ‘Our Olympics’ (see links for the others). Who can forget the sight of no less a figure than LBWF CEO Martin Esom scurrying round the borough’s public libraries to collect in as many copies of the council’s Olympic guide to Leyton as he could, lest he and his chums be blamed for the evolving fiasco that was the Leyton Market? A ‘Gold medal for ineptitude’, indeed. ‘Our Olympics’: (1) LBWF and Leyton Market – the Council wins a ‘gold medal for ineptitude’ In the immediate run-up to the... »

Page 17 of 85«1516171819»