Cracks in St. Andrew's Car Parks

The news that cracks have started to appeal in St. Andrew's Car Park is very worrying indeed, especially as this is a much trumpeted effort which has won awards in the past. I hope that the council are swift in their report on this because the public will naturally be concerned. I have submitted an emergency question to Council on Tuesday but am yet to hear if it has been accepted. In the meantime you can read more here.

The Next General Election in 30 Minutes

After a discussion about getting more people interested in the work of the council, we then had a debate which one member of the public who did turn up to watch the council meeting described as a "disgrace". It was interesting and I cannot deny I love the cut and thrust of what we do, especially when the council is being political-with-a-capital-P, but this person said the debate was "messy, generally thoughtless and the kind of thing that puts us [ the voter, I assume ] off." I think that was a bit far - after all the debate gave us a very clear insight into the next election.

The motion was one that highlighted positive statements about Sure Start from national politicans (even the Green Party) and suggested that we ought to back the service and refrain from unfair political attacks - such as those parties who might suggest another party wishes to scrap Sure Start because this worries people unncessarily. I don't think anyone expected what came next ...

Cllr Andrew Wiltshire moved a very good speech about the work that Sure Start did. I have to say that I was left bewildered by the response of Labour's Cllr Sue Sands who reeled off a list of clubs that her Sure Start ran citing this as the reason it ought to continue. Great idea; let's share good practice from around the City. Unfortunately Cllr Sands doesn't seem to appreciate the work of Health Visitors quite so much and doesn't see the next to expand their work or to have a multi-agency approach to what Sure Start does. Cllr Ramsay, Green Leader, gave a good speech in favour of the motion - then LibDem Cllr Lubbock (and quite why she was chosen to respond was beyond me) descided to take the motion apart line by line. She didn't appreciate me correcting her every error - including when she criticised the stated aim of Sure Start (as taken from their website). A bizarre moment of my life that one. Lesson 101 of the Council; Whenever you want to oppose a motion but can't work out a decent reason you always say it is "badly written". I'd say her speech was badly written alright. Council Leader Cllr Steve Morphew wanted to know what the Conservatives would change about Sure Start and it was laid out some specifics about changing the role of the Health Visitors, the link to early years education and the role/direction of local services. Not good enough for Cllr Morphew who demands to know more. He is given more. He doesn't like the response so screams that he wasn't given an answer. He was given an answer, he just didn't like it or agree with it. So Cllr Morphew has the words of David Cameron stricken from the motion; quite why is beyond me but never mind. The motion is still passed - yes, the Conservatives still voted for it - and I assume Labour will continue to frighten some very young and very vulnerable voters with this come election time.

I remember letters written by Steve Morphew to the people of Bowthorpe saying that if they didn't vote Labour they wouldn't get new windows in their council homes. They didn't vote Labour but they still got new windows. Maybe we can't believe everything our Council Leader says?

So why do I say that this is a marker for the next General Election? Labour say everything is fine, keep spending chaps and smile for the cameras; the Conservatives want to change and reform our services so they better serve out communities; the LibDems look bewildered; and the Greens had very little indeed to say about the issue.

So could I convince the member of the public of this? No, but they thought none of us came out well. They were annoyed that what should have been a fairly bland political moment was hijacked by Labour. Get used to it, there's plenty of months before the election and I suspect all issues will be subject to this kind of game playing.

Let the political debate begin (we just might want to warn the public first!)

The difference between opposition and "opposition"

The Northern City Centre Action Plan came to full council this week for debate and vote - a full 6 years in the making. One of the interesting points that has come across in the media was the Green amendment regarding the road system around Anglia Square. What happened was that both the Conservative and the LibDem groups spoke against the transport part of the proposal but recongised the strenght of the overall plan - and thus voted against the Green amendment and for the whole plan. We have been attacked for doing so. So let me explain.

The hardest thing in politics is where the plan ABC contains A and B that you agree with and C that you don't. How do you vote? Are we willing to sacrifice A and B, and all the time and effort it has taken to get to this point, over the issue of C? Clearly the Greens were but both the LibDems and Tories weren't. So to make our point known, 2 Tory Councillors - Collishaw and Fisher - spoke for the overall plan and against the one aspect. And so we give the plan support but highlighting an issue we disagree with. I think that's a pretty responsible way of doing business. If we ever believe that C's problems outweight the advantages of A and B then we would vote against; but this wasn't one of those times.

Full Council: Too Litte, Too Late?

Rather like a football team stuck to the bottom of the league who suddenly get 3 points on the last day of the season, the LibDems used the last full council meeting of the year to good effect; in fact, from their point of view, it is a shame that few people will appreciate their strongest performance since I was elected.

We experienced a sustained attack on the Labour executive from 3 members of the public, all of whom put down questions regarding traffic calming on Mount Pleasant. I thought they did extremely well - some people don't like taking on Councillors and others waffle for ages, but this trio of residents made poor old Cllr Brian Morrey (Lab, Catton Grove) look like an idiot and made their point very effectivly. How, they asked, would the 20mph zones be enforced? Don't know, said Morrey, ask the police. So how much money is put aside for traffic calming on Mount Pleasant? 25k says Cllr Morrey - but thats for the consultation! Hang on, say residents, how much traffic calming could that buy in itself? I'd love to see more of these intelligent, articulate residents taking on a political establishment that seems to be totally divorced from reality. Well done to all of them.

We then formally nominated the BBC's Roy Waller as the new Sheriff.

I'm sure that the Treasury Management Strategy Report is vital and needs to be debated by full council, but from the general standard of questions and answers you have to wonder why. The only decent questioning, if I might be so bold, came from the Conservatives. Cllr Eve Collishaw (Con, Catton Grove) tore through the figures - actually probably so well that the breadth of questions was lost. Cllr John Wyatt (Con, Bowthorpe) asked how the council balance the ethical and financial nature of investment and I asked about the £80m debt that the councilo has and what would happen to it under unitary - "is this Norwich's final legacy to the districts around us?" Even super-clever Labour Cllr Alan Waters (Crome) couldn't answer and so an officer did. The trouble is that the political back-and-forth you could have with an Exec member isn't really possible across the chamber with an officer.

Chair of Scrutiny Cllr Stephenson (Green, Nelson) then reported back on the Year of Exercise & Sport Motion that said we didn't have the time, money or resources to complete. It was all plodding along fine, including the LibDem Brian Watkins (Eaton) who originally proposed the motion accepting the verdict when his ward colleague Judith Lubbock lept up to declare that if we stopped spending money on other things - such as the works on Unthank Rd - then we could afford this. Sadly, of course, Cllr Lubbock misses the point about budget streams but she does have a point regarding waste as council level. How curious the LibDems should discover this so close to an election!

We then turned to yet another one of Brian Morrey's hobby-motions - this time World Water Day. If it is a good cause, add the word "hour, day or week" to the end and Cllr Morrey will propose it. Of course it is right and proper to talk about water usage and supply, but as Cllr Lubbock made the point forcefully, it is barking that the council doesn't monitor its use or try to save money by cutting down. This turned from a fluffy motion, as hoped by Cllr Morrey, into a political bunfight. However, step up again Cllr Watkins who made a blistering attack on the envrionment policies of the government. If this was a pitch for the LibDem leadership, no other candidate need apply. It was excellent - well pitched and timed too. Luckily, with all this excitement, we had the other Cllr Little (Green, Town Close) to give a speech so dull some of us forgot what the motion was. Three cheers to the Lord Mayor for being so accurate with his allocated time slot...

Cllr Hereward Cooke's last motion to council - on Restorative Justice - also found cross party support and he spoke passionately for the concept. The Conservatives raised a few objections, and a few realities, but it still managed to find its way to the executive ok.

Cllr Lubbock stepped into the fray at the end of a long meeting to ask for council's support in opposing the HGV usage of the Newmarket Road bus lane. Well done her but she looked vaguely surprised when I suggested that one solution to traffic in the city was building the NDR...

It was, overall, a fun and boisterous pre-election meeting. We have another one on Wednesday to hear a damning government verdict on our accounts. 7.30 in City Hall if you are free!

Just another night at full council...

Well, the fact that the first news tonight was that all of the Conservative Questions to Council were sucked into the giant IT black hole at the council kind of set the tone of what was to come.

We kicked off with the installing of Judge Jacobs as an honourary recorder. Cllr Morphew, Leader of the Council, did a very bland speech and Cllr Cooke, LibDem Leader, did an almost too political speech. I feel they should have aimed somewhere in between. However the speech by Judge Jacobs was pitch perfect and brilliant to listen to - actually one of the best efforts in a very long time. If he judges as well as he speaks, then the City has a great new ally.

We then had an interesting question time with the public; a representative from Amnesty really took Cllr Ferris apart over charges for stalls in the City - her defence was pretty poor and it is evidence that the public can really make a point at these question times. My favourite part was one lady who listened carefully to Cllr Morrey's craefuly crafted answer about the danger to cyclings of glass on the road, only to respond: "Errr, does that mean you are actually doing to do anything?"

Then community campaigner Niall Baxter submitted our congestion charge petition. Niall did very well - speaking to council is a nerve racking experience and I rememer shaking with fear when I first used a question to then-Council Leader Ian Couzens about the threat to Ellacombe Care Home in Thorpe Hamlet. So Niall managed to get through his speech with clarity and purpose (which is more than some Councillors do). Some LibDems, accepting the implict criticism of them, didn't manage to stay for the whole thing. I know he's an opponent and I shouldn't say this by Cllr Morrey did a very good job in responding; with one factual slip - the Norwich Conservatives opposed the C-Charge before Labour, remember my motion of June 06? His joke at the end about facing both ways was well timed and really bought the house down. About time Cllr Morrey put in a good performance. It almost makes up for his normal pisspoor efforts at Question Time.

Talking of which ... this was spectacularly dull ... Cllr Wright (LibDem, Eaton) asked about the No. 25 bus stop at Castle Meadow, Cllr Read (Green, Wensum) asked how up to date the electoral maps were and Cllr Jago (Green, Mancroft) asked when the old elections office in City Hall would be re-let. Cllr Wyatt (Con, Bowthorpe) asked again about the relationship between the UEA and her neighbours. Nothing really to report; sadly.

Then, a really rare sight - the next motion was to make the wonderful Cllr Hooke (LibDem), Thorpe Hamlet's one-vote wonder - the Lord Mayor elect. This movement at great speed and shockingly I hadn't made it from my seat to the water cooler back to my seat in time and totally missed the vote. Bugger! Because I had planned on voting against him! ;-)

Cllr Bearman (Green, Town Close) then moved a very worthy motion about allotments, which was supported by Cllr Brociek-Coulton (Lab, Sewell) - in remarkable amounts of detail - and also by Cllr Lubbock (LibDem, Eaton) - in a bumbled speech she clearly hadn't prepared - and Cllr John Wyatt (Con, Bowthorpe) - allotment holder-in-chief of the council who somehow managed to blame the government for overgrown weeds. Well done him.

The up stepped Cllr Morrey to ask us to join the rest of the world in switching our lights off for an hour 8pm-9pm on 29th March (a Saturday). Cllr Cooke (LibDem, Lakenham) made a classic speech urging us to door more interesting activities in the dark - a superb piece of oratory and the like that the council will be poorer for when he leaves. Needless to say it got passed.

Finally the awarding of the Freedom of the City to RAF Marham. Again Cllr Morphew made the dull-but-worthy speech in favour and left the really good stuff up to LibDem Deputy Leader Cllr Watkins (Eaton). Cllr Watkins was passionate, informative and thoroughly decent. We had the pleasure of several excellent speeches tonight and this was one of them. I followed up by suggesting that although this was the FotC for the RAF it should be taken as indicative of our support for all of our armed forces. I suggested that Norwich was proud of the RAF - which didn't recieve support across the chamber. Whilst Labour, Conservatives, LibDems and some Greens voted in favour it was notable that Cllrs Stephenson (Nelson), Llewelyn (Wensum), Read (Wensum) and Gledhill (Nelson) all abstained. Are we not backing the RAF then, chaps?

All in all not the most important meeting and certainly no worlds were set on fire. But we did experience some really good speeches and no real foul ups tonight. Maybe, actually, council at its best?

The Budget Debate

Yesterday was the longest and hardest council meeting of the year; both physcially in terms of the lenght and stress of the meeting but also because of the issues involved. Nobody in the council is an expert on every section of the budget and, despite our claims, no party leader has a total grasp even given all the extra meetings we've had on this recently. Our meeting saw some robust exchanges and some honest views being set out - given that most of the budget was thrashed out well in advance, god knows how long we'd have been there if we hadn't of done that!

Firstly the Leader of the Council, Cllr Morphew, moves the budget framework; that is the high level strategy direction that the budget will follow. Cllr Morphew couldn't resist turning it into a kind of two-year review of his administration; incuding battering the poor LibDems - the first of many batterings and their party must have left the chamber feeling very down indeed. Cllr Morphew set out changes to the financial regime, improvements in housing, CCTV extension ... in fact, I accuse dhim of sounding like a Stalinist Minister reeling off the tractor production figures. Outgoing LibDem Leader Cllr Hereward Cooke took an open shot at Cllr Morphew but seemed to be leaving his best fire for later. LibDem Cllr Carl Mayhew (Mile Cross) joined us in abstaining on this item, against his own party decision to vote in favour.

Then the budget itself is moved. Cllr Alan Waters, Executive Member for Finance, made a decent and amusing stab at justifying the budget - including some very amusing powerpoint slides and a pre-emptive attack on other budget amendments. My only feeling was that Cllr Waters spent too much time knocking the alternatives rather than saying why his budget was the best. Then came the LibDem budget amendment...

... they wanted to have a council tax rise of 2.95% and give an extra £32,000 to Visit Norwich Ltd - and to pay for it, they'd cut the wardens programme by £92,000. I have to say on first hearing this I couldn't believe our political luck. The wardens are popular, hard working and successful - the LibDems wanted to sack some of them in favour of tourism???

Cllr Cooke seemed like a man who knew his time was up and hardly flourished on his last big occassion. He put forward the amendment but did so in a quiet way, almost hoping this might take the edge off the atatcks from other parties. A shame - Cllr Cooke is, despite his party's difficulties, one of the best orators on the council. This should have been his moment to really make one last stand before standing down. It feel flat; not a disaster but without any spark. The same can't be said for his Deputy, Cllr Brian Watkins (Eaton), who led with a clenched fist in a passionate defence on VisitNorwich. Cllr Watkins has long been an advocate of a strong tourist strategy and he clearly had the bit between his teeth. However, a good speech went bad when he slipped and said the LibDems wanted to give "32 million" to VisitNorwich rather than just £32,000. Oh dear.

The LibDem amendment cut little ice with other parties; I'm afriad I couldn't sit by and watch all this go through without making a fuss. Whilst I'm sure Labour would be happy just to let the votes roll through, Cllr Ramsay accused the LibDems of "throwing good money after bad" and suggested they were writing "a blank cheque" for VisitNorwich.

I was rather less kind. I said it, "looks like a visionless effort from a leaderless party ... it has the desperate smack of a party who knows its time is up ... we're dealing with a failing organisation who don't seem to be able to fulfill their purpose, wandering lost and trying to find some measure of support (that's the LibDems, not VisitNorwich) ... perhaps this is about undercutting Labour, well I tell you they aren't going to undercut the Conservatives; we'll deliver tax cuts because we believe in tax cuts ... thousands raised, thousands spend, thousands wasted but only now do the LibDems realise that tax is too high ... no ideas, no vision, no leadership and quite frankly, no hope!"

Cue LibDem groaning and plenty of cheers; I'm told even clapping from the public gallery. The LibDems lost their amendment 7 votes to 17 with 11 abstentions; including their very own Cllr Mayhew.

Then came our amendment. We would have;
Reduce spending on Unitary by £500,000
Use £300,000 to reduce council tax
Use £200,000 to support community projects through the People's Fund

In my speech, I said that this "was not an attempt to de-rail unitary - believe me, we've tried that - ...now is the time to say that the project has gone on long enough and cost more than enough ... other districts will be paying out just £300,000 so why can't we just spend what everybody else will ... this isn't about unitary, it's about unitary without the waste, it isn't about council tax, it's about a signal that this council won't accept ever higher bills, this isn't about extra funding for community projects, it's about the best use of our limit resources."

I have to admit to not knowing quite what the opposition arguements were. Cllr Waters was so nice and charming that I totally lost what he was saying. He did use a typical Labour trick of plucking a figure out of the air and claiming we'd cut service. Errr, no. There's only 2 cuts - the unitary budget and then everyone's council tax bills. We were then told that council tax bill cuts would only benefit the middle classes. I'm sorry, does everybody else not pay council tax? Finally Cllr Waters assured us that the rise was only 3p per week anyway. Well, that's OK ... if it wasn't my 3p in the first place and I can still spend it better than the council can.

The other-Cllr Little (Green, Town Close) made an incoherant and bizarre speech of which I can remember little (no pun) other than being accused of electioneering. I'm surprised that Cllr Read could contain himself, but it took Cllr Collishaw (Con, Catton Grove) to come to my aid. I then surprised the council by revealing that I am a conservative, favour a small council and tax cuts; one mans electioneering is another man's political principle.

After our sound defeat (31 votes to 3!) Cllr Ramsay, Green Leader, clearly felt his own side had missed their chance so tried to come back to our amendment which, needless to say, I had to stop using a Point of Order. Come on, chaps, let's do this right!

In the final vote on the budget, it was left to Labour and the Conservatives as the other groups chose to sit it out. The final result was 13 votes to 3; we voted against Labour's 3.7% tax hike.

A good debate, well natured and largely good fun. We all had our say, votes were taken and I suppose the will of the city was heard. Roll on next year...

... one pleasing footnote was that during another topic, I managed to force te delightful Cllr Lubbock to storm out of the chamber. Half a dozen other councillors congratulated me afterwards, saying they had always wanted to do the same thing!!!

More tomorrow ... a friend in the galery wrote some pen portraits which I will publish.

Norwich Tories 0% council tax rise bid

Norwich Conservatives will today launch our alternative budget ahead of Tuesday’s crunch council meeting. The budget will see more investment into key areas such as recycling but will trim the unitary spending of the council to deliver an overall freeze on council tax.

Taxpayers in Norwich have been hammered by Labour year after year. Once again we are looking again at inflation busting rises that will see senior citizens and low income families suffer.

That’s why, as Conservatives, we believe in keeping council tax low. Conservative run South Norfolk Council has led the way in setting a freeze on council tax and now we hope to do the same in Norwich.

Clearly much of the spending is good, but unitary stands alone as being Labour’s great white elephant in the City. We’re picking up the bill for Labour’s political vanity.

It is ridiculous that when services are in need of extra investment and people across Norwich are being told there is no money available, we are planning to spend £800,000 of taxpayers money on Unitary. This brings the bill for Unitary well into the millions for the people of Norwich.

Clearly the council needs to do some preparation work so we are suggesting a compromise – that £300,000 be taken out of the unitary budget and be used to cut tax for thousands of hard working people across the City.

However, we would go further than that – trimming another £250,000 off Labour’s unitary bill and putting that money directly into future community projects, making the lives of people around our City better.

The unitary debacle has gone on long enough and cost more than enough. It’s time people knew that at least one party is willing to put them, their families and their services first in all this. The Conservatives are willing to take tough decisions and say that tax is too high and must now come down.

Residents can also use the elections this May to send Labour and the LibDems a message – if you want to pay less tax, spend more on services and less on political bureaucracy you have to vote Conservative.

Blogging Council Question Time - December

For once the Questions certainly outshone the debates in terms of topics, answers and good old fashioned political point scoring.

Attack of the Day
An uncharacteristically boisterous attack from Cllr John Wyatt (Con, Bowthorpe) who asked the Executive if they would lobby the UEA to accommodate more students on campus in order to save the Norwich housing stock. Cllr Bert Bremner, Executive Member for Communities, replied it gave the normally docile Tory a bit of an electric shock. Cllr Wyatt responded saying that the answer was "typically evasive and devoid of any real action". It certainly didn't answer Cllr Wyatt's question but could Cllr Bremner - who has incurred the wrath of UEA students several times - really be failing to provide leadership on this? Apparently so. So shocked was he that Cllr Bremner refused to answer the question. Oh dear - not a festive start.

Fluff of the Day
Cllr Wright (LibDem, Eaton) with a quite bizarre question about data protection. It was clearly meant for some press release or another and was meant to be topical but it failed miserably on all counts. Some ideas are just too clever I suppose.

Insult of the Day
"Comparing yourselfs to the woeful performance of the last LibDem administration is like saying Terry Venebals was a good England manager but only compared to Steve McClaren." Cllr Little (Con, Bowthorpe)

Angry Man of the Day
LibDem Jeremy Hooke (Thorpe Hamlet) launched into Executive Member Cllr Alan Waters about council tax collection rates with the gusto of a man possessed with political indignation. But when he got the reply he wanted, the wind was well and truly out of his sails.

Exchange of the Day
For a second month running this goes to Cllr Lubbock (LibDem, Eaton) who is moving away from her reputation for shooting herself in the foot. She asked if Cllr Morrey (Labour) would back the campaign to reduce the speed limit on Newmarket Road. When Cllr Morrey said no, Cllr Lubbock produced with wonderful timing and brilliant tone, a quote from Charles Clarke backing the plans. "Well, he's the MP and I'm on the council ... er, I have nothing to do with Charles Clarke," spluttered poor old Cllr Morrey. A second direct hit for Cllr Lubbock.

Question of the Day
The billing of LibDem Deputy Leader Brian Watkins (Eaton) versus Labour's Bert Bremner (University) didn't quite live up to the billing, but it was a well crafted question. Cllr Bremner has been involved with the campaign to save the Blackdale fields for some time. His Labour government has given permission to sell off the fields, so Cllr Watkins asked if the government had let down local people. There was no right answer to this question for Cllr Bremner. So he started a long rant about the campaign not being dead. Very very boring and most people had forgotten the political hole he was in by the end of it. Cllr Watkins had the chance to pour on pressure but his supplementary was a bit flat and let Cllr Bremner off the hook. A great question but, to be honest, a pisspoor answer.

Answer of the Day
In a bunch of Green questions that fell flat, the best of them was from Cllr Little (Town Close) who asked what carbon reduction has so far been achieved. To what poor old Cllr Brian Morrey splutter and wince and then admit he had no idea was priceless. Apparently we were making progress, but, er, um, nobody has any idea how much. If at all. Really. Ah. Yes. Cllr Morrey had a bad night all round really. Full marks to Cllr Read (Green, Wensum) who was quick enough during his question to say, "I wanted an answer to the last question actually but I suppose the answer to this one will do."

Don't mistake activity for achievement

The desperation of opposition has sunk into the LibDems, having issued two press releases in two months attacking the Greens and Conservatives for not putting forward motions at council. The reason I call this desperate is because it fundamentally mistakes activity for achievement.

In the last year or so the Conservatives have put forward motions on congestion charging, travellers, climate change and unitary.

The Greens have put forward motions on frois gras and sustainable developments.

The LibDems have put forward motions on plastic bags, high speed rail links to London and now energy saving at City Hall.

I'm not saying that any are more important than the others (except maybe the Frois Gras one) but it is right that parties should only put forward motions that are meaningful, workable and will make an impact. Some of the absolutely tat we have to debate from the LibDems fails on all three counts. In the end, it seems to me that the Labour administration has taken to ingoring LibDems motions because they are not costed and that is because the LibDems seem unwilling to take part in proper budget negotiations.

Anyway, this is a typical politico issue that virtually nobody outside of City Hall and party meetings will care about.

And who am I to, for example, mention that the only party to use 100% of their chances to cross question the Executive are the Conservatives, with LibDem members frequently failing to scrutinise Labour?

Or that the LibDem Leader used his time on scrutiny to complain about the page numbering in a report and left it to the Conservative Leader to attack the tone and content?

Of course, I wouldn't mention such things ...

Full Council Agenda - December

Next Tuesday, 7.30pm at City Hall
1. Lord Mayor's Announcements
2. Declarations of Interest
3. Questions from the Public
4. Petitions
5. Minutes
6. Questions to the Executive
7. Review of Licensing Policy
8. Motion - Energy Efficiency in Council Buildings, Proposed by Cllr Cooke, LibDem Leader

Should be short ... and maybe just a little bit brutal!

Questions & Answers

Summary of the questions asked at this month's council meeting.

Cllr Rosalind Wright (LibDem, Eaton) asked if charity shops were being charged for waste disposal. We all thought she was on to something there, but the answer from Labour frontbencher Cllr Brian Morrey was a simple no (spread over 4 paragraphs).

Bowthorpe's Councillor John Wyatt (Con) asked, if the council wanted to build houses on the site of old garages how they would work out which garages would be used. Council Leader Steve Morphew replied that the location, usage and condition were all factors. Cllr Morphew then made an unwarranted attack on Cllr Wyatt, suggesting he could have got this information by asking. Cllr Wyatt then embarrassed the council leader by revealing he had asked ... but hadn't been answered!

Cllr Morphew's bad mood spread over into his repsonse to Cllr Collishaw (Con, Catton Grove) when she asked how he felt about the £3 per passenger development tax at Norwich Airport. Cllr Morphew attacked the charge, saying it may indeed deter passengers, but also then turned on Cllr Collishaw for the use of the word "tax" when it should have been "charge". Shouldn't the Leader of the Council have more things to worry about?

Cllr Little (Con, Bowthorpe) asked if the Council would introduce freephone and freepost so that people didn't pay to contacted their own council. Moneyman Cllr Alan Waters tutted like a builder and said that this all costs money. Cllr Little asked, in principle, if he supported it if money was not a problem. Cllr Waters, in a moment of honesty, replied no.

Cllr Cooke (LibDem, Lakenham) asked when the future use of City Hall report would be made public - this is a frequent question and the LibDems have made some political headway in persuing this issue. Cllr Waters said that unitary would change all demands and the report would have to wait.

Cllr Lubbock (LibDem, Eaton) was the only member to score a direct hit during the questioning session - asking how much the doomed Unthank Road changes cost the public. Cllr Morrey confirmed it was 10% either way of £140,000. Cllr Lubbock's supplementary was an example of what can be achieved with this kind of questioning, blasting the total waste of money on the whole scheme. Cllr Morrey, who usually uses Cllr Lubbock as a political punchbag, was left looking rather foolish.

Cllr Stephen Little (Green, Town Close) asked about energy saving in housing developments and was satisfied with an answer that went above the heads of most present.

Cllr Claire Stephenson (Green, Nelson) asked how councillors could keep track of motions passed at council. Cllr Morphew replied that, short of the weekly bulletin, they couldn't. He also pointed out that the council didn't have the resources to support every motion passed at council. Cllr Stephenson then came back, asking the Leader to define the word "regular", missing the open goal of asking what the point of passing motions was if council was going to ignore them.

Cllr Bob Gledhill (Green, Nelson) asked if we could recycle aluminium. Cllr Morrey said no. Cllr Gledhill asked if we could in the future. Cllr Morrey said no. No is currently Cllr Morrey's favourite answer to questions.

Cllr Rupert Read (Green, Wensum) asked if the council kept lists of cycle thefts. Cllr Bremner, Labour Execuitve Member, replied that they didn't because the police did and to ask for those details would break the DPA. Cllr Read then started on a rambling reply which the Deputy Lord Mayor attempted to cut short. "Ask a question," she barked at Cllr Read ... "I would if you let me," replied the irrate member. Anyway, we were all so engrossed by the challenge to the authority of the Deputy Lord Mayor that we totally missed the point and answer to the question.

Next came an interesting clash of the left. Cllr Holmes (Green, Wensum) asked if the Norfolk Pension Scheme invested in any companies with a poor ethical record. Cllr Waters, a Labour member and certainly no New Labour stooge, replied that they weren't really sure, but that in general the performance of the pension scheme outweighed the need for ethics. Cllr Holmes barked a rather hysterical response about how people who lived with abuse may feel about his asnwer. Cllr Waters was in a tight spot - you either protect people in poor conditions abroad or protect the pensions of people in Norfolk. I'm sure this isn't the last we'll hear of this issue.

We flew through the next set of question with little or nothing to report - Cllr Dylan (Green, Mancroft) on democratic involvement in the council's tenant housing stock, Cllr Bearman (Green, Town Close) asked if the council were working towards "matrix" standard, Cllr Llewellyn (Green, Mancroft) asked what the council was doing to support the Families Support Unit and Cllr Jago (Green, Mancroft) asked about involvement of residents association.

Even ever-present Cllr Ramsay (Green, Nelson) was happy with the answer to his question about how inclusive the Boundary Commission report would be.

It was a shame that so many questions - overwhelmingly from the Greens - failed to ignite or hit the spot this month.

Knife Edge Council Vote on Congestion Charging

At the full council meeting last week, the Council voted for a LibDem motion to accept the Congestion Charge, albeit with various conditions attached. It was one of the closest votes in the chamber, which could have swung either way as members came and went from the floor. In the end, I forced it to a recorded vote so that local people could check how their councillor voted. I have added the wards to make it easier for people to see who their councillors are.

In the words of Cllr Lubbock, who moved the motion: "Why are people so opposed to the Congestion Charge - they need to be made to see the benefits." Her colleague, LibDem Brian Watkins added: "Roadmap for the introduction of the Congestion Charge sometime in the future."

For the Congestion Charge:
Cllrs Bearman (Green, Town Close), Cooke (LibDem, Lakenham), Divers (LibDem, Thorpe Hamlet), Dylan (Green, Mancroft), Gledhill (Green, Nelson), Hartley (LibDem, Town Close), Holmes (Green, Wensum), Jago (Green, Mancroft), S Little (Green, Town Close), Llewelyn (Green, Wensum), Lubbock (LibDem, Eaton), Ramsay (Green, Nelson), Read (Green, Wensum), Stephenson (Green, Nelson), Surridge (LibDem, Thorpe Hamlet), Watkins (LibDem, Eaton), Wright (LibDem, Eaton).

Against the Congestion Charge:
Cllrs Banham (Lab, Sewell), Blakeway (Lab, Mile Cross), Bradford (Lab, Crome), Brociek-Coulton (Lab, Sewell), Bremner (Lab, Uni), Cannell (Lab, Lakenham), Collishaw (Con, Catton Grove), Driver (Lab, Lakenham), Ferris (Lab, Bowthorpe), Lay (Lab, Crome), A Little (Con, Bowthorpe), Morphew (Lab, Mile Cross), Morrey (Lab, Catton Grove), Sands (Lab, Sewell), Waters (Lab, Crome), Wyatt (Con, Bowthorpe)

This is a serious issue - voters of Norwich, take note.

Full Council - Tuesday Night

Agenda for tomorrow's meeting:

(Normal Gumpf, followed by...0
4. Questions from the Public
5. Petitions
6. Minutes
7. Questions to the Executive
8. Boundary Review
9. Appointment of an Honourary Recorder
10. Motion on Congestion Charging, proposed by Cllr Lubbock (LibDem, Eaton) in which she lists the many criteria that, after which, we should back the CC.
11. Motion on Growing Obesity Crisis, proposed by Cllr Watkins (LibDem, Eaton) one of the most consistent advocates of sport on the council arguing that 2009 should be a year of sport in the City.
12. Motion on HMOs, proposed by Cllr Bremner (Lab, University) about introducing new planning laws for HMOs (or student houses to you and me).

Enjoyable!

Questions to Council

A bumper crop of 22 questions this month. The joy!

LibDem Leader Hereward Cooke (Lakenham) kicked off by asking if the council would use the powers in the Clean Neighbourhoods Act to set up a partnership agreement to help clean off grafitti faster. Although we all wanted Executive Member Julie Brociek-Coulton to say "no, actually, we'd rather like to keep the city looking a right state thank you" in answer to such an obvious and patronising question, she actually said that this was already on the agenda.

Tory Group Leader Antony Little (Bowthorpe) then asked how much the government's concessionary bus fare scheme had cost the City Council, a theme picked up by the EDP the following day. Brian Morrey, Executive Member, gave a reply that was deliberately complicated and threw figures around hoping nobody could put them together. Morrey was then pressed to give a yes or no answer to the simple question if the government has underfunded the council for this scheme. Far from the lack of knowledge, which he claimed to the EDP, Morrey told the council he wouldn't give the answer because he's "get into trouble". I am still awaiting the answer.

Backbencher John Wyatt (C, Bowthorpe) is developing a habit of asking rather detailed and annoying questions in council. He requested information regaring the funding and location of the City's new council houses. Although Council Leader Steve Morphew gave an explanation of the funding formula he admitted they didn't know where the homes would be built. Cllr Wyatt then asked if he would confirm that no green spaces or gardens would be lost. Cllr Morphew clearly struggled with this - one council house in poor condition may be knocked down to make way for new flats, he said, and thus gardens may be lost that way. Overall, the council still has no clue where the houses will go.

The Livestock Market is going to stay where it is, according to Labour's Alan Waters in reply to a question from Eve Collishaw (C, Catton Grove), although Cllr Collishaw hit back by asking why council officers were making it hard for the market to open. Although Cllr Waters denied this, we were left with the feeling that this issue may yet return.

Music loving Jeremy Hooke (LibDem, Thorpe Hamlet) asked if the council has considered bring the BBC Proms in the Park to Norwich. Deputy Leader of the Council Brenda Ferris replied that plans were in the pipeline and both Cllrs looked very happy with their days work.

Long suffering Carl Mayhew (LibDem, Mile Cross) has been ill for two meetings in a row but came to ask what the council were doing to ensure that youth groups applied for funding for sport and community development. He was then provided with such a long list that you wonder why the question had to be aked in the first place.

LibDem Joyce Divers (Thorpe Hamlet) wanted to know if the council will bear the cost of redecorating if their tenants property is damaged by works. Cllr Westmacott said it wasn't the case.

Post Office's were the subject of a rare question from Jill Surridge (LibDem, Thorpe Hamlet) who faces the battle of her life to hold her seat from the Greens in a few months time. Labour's response was that Scrutiny Committee should cross question the Post Office about their plans. Not a good performance and not good enough to hold her seat.

Pigeon control was the subject of Cllr Diane Lowe's question. The LibDem member for Mancroft wanted to know if the process was humane. The council admitted they had no policy on pigeon control. Then came one of the classic moments in the chamber - Cllr Lowe asked why the system pioneered by the last LibDem Council was been dumped. After conferring with her Leader, Cllr Brociek-Coulton said that the scheme was too expensive and was typical of the LibDems. Hangbags at dawn!

LibDem war-horse Judith Lubbock (Eaton) always seems to open herself to attack. She asked why there wasn't more progress towars the 20mph blanket speed limit for suburban roads. This allowed Labour's Brian Morrey to go for the jugular and remind Cllr Lubbock that she was on the committee that made this decision and it wasn't entirely in the hands of the City Council. Although Cllr Lubbock comes up with good questions she normally ends up looking foolish by then end - its quite a talent, really.

Labour backbencher David Bradford (Crome) asked the first of two rather obvious questions to his own side about the new choice-based lettings system. It gave Cllr Westmacott the chance to go on about how great it was and how well it would work. Is this really a good use of council time? Labour would argue it helps get information into the public domain - have they heard of a press release?

Then up came Brenda Ferris (Lab, Bowthorpe). She asked about safety on the Prince of Wales Road and it was not lost on the opposition parties has stupid it looked for the Deputy Leader of the Council to be asking this of her own administration! Anyway, of course things had got a lot safer and her second question asked a Labour Councillor to congratulate the Labour Council on their law and order record. Of course, he did!

The ongoing spat between Labour Leader Cllr Morphew and LibDem Tourism Spokesman Brian Watkins (Eaton) continues with some rather good scrutiny of the 5 year tourism plan. Cllr Morphew said that everything would be ready for the New Year. Cllr Watkins made a good fist of attacking Labour's drift and indecision on the issue. This issue will run and run.

Cllr Rupert Read (Green, Wensum) asked how the council would reduce their massive taxi bill and encourage mor environmentally friendly transport. Cllr Waters said that a lot of encouragement was made for people to walk and cycle. Cllr Read suggested that more encouragement be applied because it clearly wasn't working. This was put in such a humourous way I didn't hear the answer because I was laughing. Sorry.

Wi-Fi was bought up again by the Green Group and asked for it to be shelved whilst health fears are dealt with. Labour's Cllr Morrey gave the same answer as he had given before, except adding that CCTV depends on Wi-Fi and thus the Greens must be arguing against CCTV. The questioner, Cllr Adrian Holmes (Green, Wensum), was confused as he didn't ask about CCTV.

Cllr Llewellyn (Green, Wensum) wanted to ask if the council didn't use any companies involved in the current Burmese problems. The council replied that it didn't.

Cllr Jago had been informed that if you want to take a lot of garden waste to Swanton Road then you need to phone ahead in advance. Cllr Brociek-Coulton was confused as when she went nobody stopped her - although perhaps they didn't dare! Cllr Jago, who represents Mancroft for the Greens, wanted assurances and got them.

Cllr Ramsay, the Green Leader and Member for Nelson Ward, asked why potholes in some roads weren't filled in. He was given a technical explanation.

Cllr Bearman (Green, Town Close) asked why puddles were forming on Unthank Road where the recent road works took place. The Council thanked her for the information and said they would look into it. The issue, that is, not the puddle.

The Scrutiny Chairwoman Claire Stephenson (Green, Nelson) was furious that a SNAP meeting that included part of her ward wasn't advertised to the ward members, including herself. This was, apparently, an oversight and wouldn't be repeated.

The other-Cllr Little (Green, Town Close) asked why residents found it was taking so long to recieve a new green recycling box. Again, another council cock up and the backlog was being cleared.

Finally, Cllr Bob Gledhill (Green, Nelson) asked about tree planting in his ward although I fear nobody was up to hearing the answer.

And that was that for another month!

Dateline Group Room

And here we are, in the Conservative Group Room at City Hall (yes, there is one) debating the big issues of the day, with fois gras, plastic bags and webcasting council meetings all on the agenda.

Although I'm afriad that the public don't seem to share the importance of tonight's full council agenda. When I told my colleagues at work, they just laughed and said that my attendance tonight was an indication of how tragic my life has become.

I then shared it with another friend whom I met in the City, who just responded with a sign and asked why we couldn't talk about something important - like fixing the pavement outside of her house.

Do the public share the priorities of their council? Hardly, but let's hope the agenda gets a little more relevant in future.

Questions & Answers

As I didn't blog about the recent full council meeting I thought I would update you on the question and answers given to give you some idea about the subjects that councillors are raising.

New elected Councillor John Wyatt (Con, Bowthorpe) asked how much the council was owed in rent arrears. Labour's Executive Member for Housing, Julie Westmacott, said that the council had failed to collect £1.6m this year and this was only forcast to fall to £1.4m next year. Cllr Wyatt accused the council of being cavalier with taxpayers money and lacking ambition in wanting to tackle the problem. Council Leader Cllr Morphew said that the Tory response was predictable and that the council was getting to grips with the issues.

I then asked if the council has a "zero-tolerance" approach to anti-social behaviour from council tenants, a subject that was raised time and again at the Clover Hill residents meeting. Cllr Westmacott launched a snotty answer which accused the Conservatives of suggesting that all council tenants were engaged in ASB. In bad tempered exchanges, I then asked if they would come to a CHARM meeting and explain to hard working decent tenants why they are out of order raising this problem, as they seemed I was in putting the question. Labour's Cllr Bremner, in replying gave a list of things the council was doing to cut ASB.

Cross-party harmony then broke out as Cllr Collishaw (Con, Catton Grove) congratulated the council on looking at brownfield infilling to solve the housing crisis and asked when the council survey on the use of garages was going to be published. Cllr Morphew replied that it would be released as soon as it was done.

Cllr Hooke (LibDem, Thorpe Hamlet), fresh from his 1 vote victory over the Greens, asked what the cost of the concessionary bus fares was going to be. Executive Member Brian Morrey replied that it was estimated at £1.35m but that this figure could change.

Due to the recent arson attack on her home, Cllr Lubbock (LibDem, Eaton) wasn't there to hear the answer to her question about parking around St. Andrew's Plain. Cllr Morrey gave another stroppy answer - Lubbock faces a regular stream of these - in which he suggested that she already knew the answer. However Labour then promised a blitz on illegal parkers in the area, which I think was the point of Cllr Lubbock's question in the first place.

The Norman Centre has long been the central campaigning issue for all parties in the North of the City, and Cllr Carl Mayhew (LibDem, Mile Cross) is making a great play of this in the run up to his re-election campaign next year. However, once again, he walked into a bit of an elephant trap asking why it didn't open at weekends. Labour's Culture Member Brenda Ferris suggested he asked his LibDem colleagues - who cut the centre opening hours during their term in office in 2003. Cllr Mayhew had a rough meeting all-in-all suggestion later that councillor's shouldn't be given allowances. Oh dear. Desperate Carl then had the weight of all parties on his back...

Councillor Little (Green, Town Close) asked what consultation the City Council had done regarding the wi-fi system given the health risks. Cllr Morrey said it wasn't a city council function but that the county council thought that there were no risks. He suggested that Cllr Little write to the relevant government department.

Cllrs Watkins (LibDem, Eaton) and Dylan (Green, Mancroft) both asked about the council position on the Innes' project for the re-development of City Hall. Cllr Waters, in his usual fashion, said that members should control their enthusiasm for such schemes until the review of council property - including taking police opinions into account - were complete. He outlined the process, including a series of meetings.

Puddles occupied the mind of Cllr Bearman (Green, Town Close) this month complaining loudly (well, as loud as she gets) about puddles in the council's underground cycle store. How Cllr Waters kept a straight face answering this was beyond me - but he said that after work on the car park was complete then this would be a priority. Cllr Bearman complained that she waded through inches of water and this discouraged cycling. Cllr Waters couldn't agree more!

Cllr Hume (LibDem, University) clarified the rules of bulky collection for the elderly. Cllr Cooker, Lib Dem Leader and Lakenham Member, then asked how other group leaders would input into the renegotiation of the CityCare contract. Cllr Morphew said he had no idea but would raise it at group leaders meetings.

Housing was raised again - this time by Cllr Lowe (LibDem, Mancroft) - who asked why the length of time required to bring a house back into use had risen under Labour. Cllr Westmacott replied that the department has worked hard to address this and the time was now falling again.

Finally, the only Labour member to ask a question Cllr Cannell (Lab, Lakenham) asked what support the council gave to live music. Cllr Ferris replied "lots" and then gave an answer that I think was more planned for the media than for councillors interests. Too cynical perhaps?

And that was that for another few weeks...

Greens vote LibDem, Tory votes Labour, Labour won't vote for anyone ... a strange night at the council!

Last night's Full Council meeting was probably the most bizarre - and badly attended - I have ever known.

Labour were short of 5 members, Tories 1 down and the LibDems 1 down. Only the Greens fielded a full team - but in a bizarre twist all of the three big groups had 10 members each.

It was John's first council meeting and his reaction was quite telling. He thought that it addressed some of the big issues that face Norwich but also has the ability to drift off into complete obscurity.

And then the really odd stuff started.

Labour's in-house attack dog Cllr Sands took up a whole speech telling us how 10 years of Labour government had made education worse in Norwich.

Executive Members Cllr Alan Waters and Cllr Steve Morphew agreed that their own government had made a balls up of the NHS and planning.

The Green Party voted for LibDem Chief Cllr Hereward Cooke to be Chair of the Audit Committee ... but only after Cllr Cooke grovelled to council and had to admit his party lied and cheated during the election.

Then I voted for Labour Cllr Keith Driver ... only his own side didn't. It was left with a Conservative councillor being the only person to vote for a Labour committee chair.

Then the LibDems and Greens stitched up a bizarre amendment to a motion that stopped us voting against it.

I'll post my thoughts during the week!

It's NOT manflu - am so happy!

It's twenty-five to five in the afternoon and I'm just up.

Yesterday I went to my GP who told me that was actually something wrong with me and it couldn't have made me happier. The thought that I have been miserbale and unwell for 10 days now and it turns out to be nothing would be too much to take. Hence, the fact that I do have something wrong with me, despite the obvious misery that brings, does actually make the pain and discomfort somewhat more worthwhile.

If you want to know just how bad it is, because I have been told I shouldn't talk (by the GP that is, not by the Labour Party) I didn't go to yesterday's council meeting ... the first I have ever missed. I didn't get the chance to rip Labour's budget apart and vote against their 4.7% max tax hike. Bugger. But I'm sure everyone there would have known that if I was there I would have voted against it.

I can now cuddle up with my antibiotics, series 3 of Spooks on DVD and a very large bowl of Rice Krispies to relax.

Steve Morphew accused of being bias in favour of Mile Cross

City Council Leader Steve Morphew had an uncomfortable time on Tuesday night as a combination of the public, the Greens and the LibDems heaped pressure on him for allegedly being bias in favour of improvements in Mile Cross as opposed to the rest of the City.

It started when a member of the public, one Brenda Lock, said that the council didn't care about Heathgate Community Centre because it wasn't in Mile Cross and that's where all the money went. A startled reaction from Councillors and the public. Although Steve strongly denied this, it led to some further exchanges later in the evening. Green Leader Adrian Ramsay concurred that a lot of money was spent in Mile Cross, because it was a tough Lib-Lab battleground seat, and LibDem Councillor for Mile Cross Carl Mayhew was also stirring the pot.

At the end of it I feel Steve looked a bit startled by all of this - more from the public than Councillor.

I wonder if it is true - a breakdown of total spending ward by ward would be interesting. Another member of the public told me afterwards that ift felt like all the money went to Eaton. An interesting perspective also.

It is natural to want the best for your ward. We all do it - fighting hard for our communities, sometimes knowing that other areas may suffer as a result. Although I believe Steve hasn't abused his position as Leader of the Council in favour of his ward, I think this line of attack may well come back time and time again.

Full Council: Attendance Watch

2 Councillors absent this time - Brian Morrey (Lab, Catton Grove) and Jull Surridge (LibDem, Thorpe Hamlet). All Tories and Greens present and correct.

The Conservatives are the only party with a 100% record since May's elections!