Tory CCTV Car(s) Cost

Tory CCTV Car in press again as issues of legality and profitability hit the white vulture cars

Looks like a few interesting Freedom of Information requests this month...

Please confirm the total of all drivers and operatives used for the Medway CCTV car, from the first day they were used, and up to 20 September 2011?

There have been a total of 45 members of staff involved with the operating, driving and reviewing of CCTV since it’s implementation.

Please supply the details of how much this has cost in wages over the same period above.

The cost of staff wages over the same period is estimated to be £340,000

Please supply all the fuel costs, repairs, servicing and costs of uniforms, also any other costs involving the CCTV cars, for the same period.

The associated costs involving the CCTV cars for the same period is £357,335.

Given the cars have probably made about £1.7-2.0m in revenue since they started we can actually calculate that profitability on these vehicles is miniscule when compared with other revenue streams and overall spend by the Council.

Labour were clear on the CCTV cars. A full review on these vehicles is required immediately; they should not be cash cows...

Put it into perspective - the overspend on the bus station over its original estimate comes out higher than all the revenue made by the car(s) since they launched.

Update - 7th November 2011

It now appears that the legality of the car is also in question as the Medway News exclusive reveals that the cars may have been acting illegally so potentially seing thousands of fines written off. I have asked a question of senior officers for a full brief on this issue - as yet, nothing...

Labour has consistently warned and pushed for a full review on this CCTV car and it was part of our manifesto in May 2011.

Medway Buses suffering under Tories

Given the botched opening of the bus station in Chatham and the Conservative u-turn over the Freedom Pass, which will still a 14 year old from Strood worse off, than an equivalent in Gravesend, it is worth looking at bus usage in Medway since the coalition came to office.

Transport is an absolutely crucial issue in Medway which is why Medway Labour put it centre-stage at the local election this year.

Labour has a long history of campaigning against fare increases with campaign events at Medway station's we have opposed the Tory train fare rises which are being imposed by the Department for Transport on train operators. We oppose the London Conservative plan for an airport on the Peninsula (Boris Airport) which is slowly but surely working its way onto a government white paper (as predicted by this blog three years ago). We have stood up for our young people pledging a full equivalent to the Freedom Pass for our young people; a pledge firstly derided by the Conservatives before they copied and pasted it this April.

Labour is leading on transport and for that reason it is right that we look at buses in Medway.

When we talk about buses this is not just the failure of the Tories to manage the bus station; though that failure is symbolic of how they manage the whole of our towns believe me. The dithering over planning, the delay over building, the damned lies over spiralling costs. A botched completion job and an operation of spin from the corridors of power to conceal the true impact on residents.

Medway residents deserve a new bus deal. Only over the last six months some scary statistics have now become clear.

Under the Tories the statistics stand for themselves:

• We have seen a massive reduction in Medway bus journeys from 9.3 to 8.9m in just one year. This represents a full reversal of increasing bus usage from 7.9m to 8.9m under the last Labour government.
• According to Passenger Focus over a third (37%) of fare-paying passengers were dissatisfied with value for money and more than a fifth (23%) were unhappy with the frequency of buses. Nothing has been done to change this perception and bus services are being reduced not extended

• We have seen Bus Services slashed – According to Freedom of Information requests we have seen cuts to Bus 165 and further cuts currently being discussed on 26 contracts. Bus services which serve the entire of Medway. These contracts carry a total of 194,392 passengers per annum. Tories are cutting your buses right now.
• Investment cut - The governments budget allocation for Medway's Integrated Transport block (which includes bus capital schemes) significantly cut from £3.5m per year to £1.5m per year in 2011/12. As a result the LTP allocation to public transport capital schemes (bus and taxi) reduced from £299k in 2010/11 to £250k in 2011/12.
• Costs for the bus station continue to be open-ended after it came out £2.3m over the original budget estimate. A number of operators are expressing major concerns at rising costs...(See attached news item)
• Travel for youth: our young people continue to be disadvantaged. Whilst KCC operate a flat £50 or £100 fee for an annual Freedom Pass our young people continue to pay extortionate rates on our bus services. Pricing them off the buses

It is a pity because the bus station could have been so much better had the Tories bothered to talk to residents. After all the original funding for the improvements via HCA (Homes & Communities Agency) Grant from the Labour government investing in buses.

But like the 11+ fiasco and the cost overuns at Walderslade, Woodlands and now on the Stoke Crossing. Its another million pound fiasco a week...

Bus services are so important to Medway residents. It is a pity that we currently have an administration that could have done so much better with the money provided, and that is currently managing significant cuts to bus services, whilst residents continue to feel they are being fleeced by Conservative Councillors.

Update

Despite asking the Conservative-controlled Council for a full list of the 26 routes listed as under consultation I was refused, saying that Councillors will only get a full list after the tender process is to be undertaken.

I have written back to complain that this is a fudge as local representatives should have clarity and transparency over bus services. Clearly proposals are in detailed stages because they are able to confirm the number of journeys made.

Five Point Plan for Jobs

Cover up over 11+ fiasco?

Yet full report is not put online for public scrutiny...

Below is an article from Peter Read, a Kent Independent Education Advisor, who has written for the Kent News on the 11+ fiasco.

The article itself raises serious questions about the ability of Rehman Chisthi to adequately represent his constituents after he expressed full confidence in the education department under Les Wicks. A questionable judgement were it not for partisan self-interest.

He needs to make it clear that if the Ombudsman rules against Cllr Wicks that he will call for his resignation.

The article does not mince its words and effectively accuses the Conservative administration of colluding in a cover up.

'Children who were treated unfairly at 11-plus test centres will never know if they would have passed

The row about the shambolic Medway Test arrangements at two test centres, described by Councillor Les Wicks, portfolio holder for education at Medway Council, as “a mortification” - continues unabated.

The Medway 11-plus is held in a number of large centres (mainly schools) on a Saturday morning in September. There have been complaints about the operation of these tests for years, the council agreeing nine changes in procedures with the Ombudsman in 2008 after a large number of complaints; last year the council admitted fault after another large number of complaints about one centre and agreed to put in a number of improvements to monitor the process.

Sadly these failed to stop what the council has now agreed were major faults at Rainham School for Girls, although it disputing the problems at the Chatham Grammar centre.

At Rainham, the council put in just one registration desk for more than 200 children, with the result that anxious queues rapidly built up waiting long past the 20 minutes allocated, the tests starting 40 minutes late. Children were therefore on site for six-and-a-half hours. There were only three boys’ toilets, half the girls’ toilets were not working so many children spent the whole of their breaks in toilet queues.

They had been told to bring a piece of fruit and a bottle of water to sustain them, which was evidently insufficient for the extended exam period. Any adult subjected to such chaos for an important exam would probably have walked out.

As it was some of the children did not have the stamina to cope. I have just listed here some of the many problems at Rainham, and Medway Council has now acknowledged that no fault attached to the school, although at least two councillors alleged the problems were down to the incompetence of the school and had apologise for this later. I could go on about the problems at Chatham, sparked by the invigilators’ failure to provide the question paper for the first exam of the day, but you can read the details at www.kentadvice.co.uk.

Medway Council’s astonishing verdict was that as half the children passed the test at Rainham, none were disadvantaged – apparently they didn’t consider the half who failed! The council promised to carry out a thorough investigation of the problems and make the outcome known to all concerned. However this has turned out to be a ‘management improvement report’, a single-page document looking forward to stop such problems recurring, that does not address the issue of why the problems arose in the first place. One can only hope it is more effective than the promises of 2010 which were supposed to stop such problems!

However, parents continue to be angry, not necessarily because of the original blunders, but because of council attempts to cover them up, and its ludicrous refusal to acknowledge some children were disadvantaged by the conditions to which they were subjected.

We await the ombudsman’s verdict on this one, but spare a thought for those children who will never know if they would have passed, if treated fairly.'

Airport looms over Medway

So much for Tory consistency over Boris Airport which has reared its head once more after the appointment of Justine Greening MP to Transport Secretary, and the subsequent lobbying efforts by the London Conservative Party in its detailed paper on aviation for London.

The latest clue comes from a written response from Theresa Villiers MP to Rehman Chisthi which has shown a clear change in government policy from opposition to willingness to consider all proposals. The inaccuracy of her response also snubs thousands of anti-Cliffe campaigners by suggesting that no recent review had been undertaken on the Peninsula - totally ignoring the rejection of the Peninsula proposals in 2002/2003.

This is, on the face of it, another major u-turn from the Cameron government which is clearly hinting to renege on absolute commitments given over the last four years that there are no plans to build an airport in the Thames Estuary.

There is also a real worry that the appointment of Justine Greening, a London MP with an anti-Heathwick caucus in her own constituency, will make expansion at Gatwick and Heathrow very unlikely.

This blog believes we are now poised to see a Conservative government u-turn and a full paper on aviation options including at Cliffe, Hoo and in the Estuary.

The Medway Conservatives have underplayed the prospect of an airport in North Kent to protect an electoral base which is sure to rally against the Tories should any white paper come forward. The Medway Labour Group has consistently warned that if you treat the airport as a joke, if your underfund any opposition campaign, and ignore the thousands being spent on scoping exercises that you will accumulate trouble later on, when the plans become more developed.

Labour submitted a motion to Full Council in 2009 on this very topic. Mark Reckless MP (then a Councillor) and Rehman Chisthi MP supported the Conservative party position to not campaign pro-actively on the issue - ignoring the reasoned argument that unless you actively oppose an issue when it is at its early stages you allow something to become more developed and entrenched.

The local Tory positioning on this issue is quickly looking knee-jerk and desperate. Cllrs' O'Brien & Chamber's moaning from the sidelines with increasingly shrill demands as they realise there total lack of forsight has left Medway residents with the prospect of a mega-airport on the doorstep.

It is all very well parochial 'village-green' Tories opposing the airport; but neither O'Brien or Chambers have any political weight. They are pygmies against the lobbying efforts of the aviation industry and the London Conservative caucus, of which Justine Greening MP is a member, which wants an airport in Kent.

Let us also not forget that the proposals as they stand are currently impacting house prices on the Peninsula. A Conservative Party mayor is therefore directly hitting house prices in Grain, All Hallows, Hoo and the villages.

A white paper and rest assured these people will be up in arms because they it will kill off the housing market in the area and will likely impact thousands of properties in the North of Medway as interested parties seek to flee the prospect of noise, congestion and a deterioration in life-quality.

The Tories locally could have done something about the Boris Airport two years ago. Instead they have treated this issue as a joke and they kicked the can down the road and it is only now, in retrospect, do they see that what seemed wise at the time has led to greater folly.

Parking, open space or slow worms!

“The latest public row about change and improvement is in Luton. Luton remains high on any index of deprivation and the council has been working with partners such as police and health to improve things. It's proving a tough job, but progress is being made.

The idea of having a Healthy Living Centre in Luton has been welcomed by many, but to date effectively blocked by a few. Where these centres have been built elsewhere in Medway - such as Rochester, Rainham and Lordswood - they have proven a marvellous asset to the community.

Time is short, the money to build this centre will soon be lost if progress is not made. There are always plenty of reasons for not doing something - whether it be parking, open space or slow worms!

If the obstacles and prevarications continue, this marvellous facility will be lost. Sadly if the objectors have their way, it will be the good people of Luton who will lose out.”

Cllr Jarrett (21/10/2011)

Substitute the word Luton with ‘Rochester’ and the words ‘health centre’ for airport and change listed ‘Rochester, Rainham and Lordswood’ with ‘Gatwick, Stansted and Heathrow’

Councillor Jarrett last week attacked the airport proposal for exactly the same reasons local residents object to the idea of a poorly located healthy living centre; Ecological, infrastructure and resident concern.

Only the same issues, which he labels ‘parking, open space or slow worms’ are happily ignored elsewhere when he has own finger on the bulldozer ignition.

Of course the two proposals are not the same; but I can imagine someone in the Mayor’s office labeling Cllr Jarrett 'anti-change' and an 'obstacle' to progress.

They deserve just as much short shrift as Cllr Jarrett's article did on Friday.

I am consistent; you can not ignore resident opinion or the concerns of ecology (whether from the RSPB or environmental groups). Only a fool runs roughshod over local opinion; and that is just as much a lesson for Boris Johnson as it is for Cllr Jarrett.

Perhaps listening to those on the ground; whether on the airport or the health centre is the best way forward. The basis for objection you will find are not altogether that different.

Update

I am quite concerned by the lack of updates from the administration on the counter-proposals on location for the health centre. All requests for further information have been met by silence, despite several emails to chase on my points mentioned here.

With the Kings Road clinic being shut the area does need a health facility - surely we can find a suitable outcome in a better location?

11+ Report slaps Wicks

The late 11+ fiasco report was finally published today, but has yet to be linked on the Medway Council website for full public review.

The report is several days late and was due to be published last week. Another delay it would seem by the Tories

For the sake of public transparency and accountability the Administration need to publish this report in all its details and in the full public domain.

Grammar school parents and pupils have been let down by the Conservative portfolio holder and the narrow clique that support him.

Hiding the report in the background when there is demonstrable public interest is not best served. Details of junior staff can be redacted if there are any conflicts of interest but some form of public document needs to be produced.

I have not had a chance to read the report; so I can not possibly comment on its content but from leaked snippets it would appear to be pretty damning on Cllr Les Wicks and his political leadership.

What I would say is that it took 13 days for Les Wicks to apologise; which is an outrageous delay, and most importantly, after he and colleaugues blamed the schools themselves.

In addition this fiasco is but one in a litany of failures on schools.

The Labour Group were rightly disappointed at last week’s Council meeting (still not published) to see that Cllr Les Wicks was unwilling to accept responsibility for his actions

This despite the litany of errors that fall within his remit:

• The 11+ exam fiasco at the Chatham Grammar School for Boys and the Rainham School for Girls where Medway Conservatives blamed the school for internal Council failures
• The botched Primary School re-organisation programme which used incorrect pupil statistics to close local primary schools, including the closure of Ridge Meadow and proposed closures of St Peter’s, Rochester and St John’s, Chatham
• The £350,000 bill to cancel photocopier contracts across schools
• The £1.8m overspend on the Walderslade School
• The £1.25m overspend on the Woodlands School
• Failure to back the Educational Maintenance Allowance for 16-18 year olds
• The cancellation of the School improvements at Luton School and the cuts to Building School budget from £5m to now cover maintenance only
• Medway being ranked close to the bottom of the Level 4 league table, with only 67% of pupils across the area gaining the level required

In any other job, that amount of error and incompetence would surely lead to dismissal.

Once I get hold of the report I will publish it online with permission

Update

The Council have not published a full report and have opted for a 'management document' which is effectively a summary of outcomes. It appears that Tories are unhappy to reveal the truth or reveal any reasons why we continue to see, year on year, cock-ups with the 11+ test.

So much for democracy.