Contact Us

You can contact the Branch Secretary, Paul Espley, by emailing sruislipandmanorlp@blueyonder.co.uk or text or phone: 07521 380497

Tuesday 27 November 2012

Boris fails on pledge to end street homelessness

Boris Johnson is very good at big announcements and warm words. But the bolder the pledge, the more serious the issue, the more important it is that you deliver.

In 2009 Johnson made a very bold pledge that he said he would end rough sleeping in London by the end of 2012.  This is a pledge that he repeated during the Mayoral election campaign just six months ago.

With just over a month to go until the end of the year, Johnson admitted at Mayor's Question Time last week that he would not be able to keep his pledge.  In fact, the number of people sleeping rough has increased every year since he became mayor, with more than 2,000 more people spending at least one night out on the streets than in 2008.


 

 
 

(acknowledgement to Tom Copley AM for source information)

 

Friday 23 November 2012

Affordable homes built by Boris drop by more than half


As reported by the BBC yesterday only 7,500 affordable homes will be completed in London during 2012 despite Tory Mayor Boris Johnson’s election pledge to build 55,000 over the next 4 years, which is an average 13,750 per annum.

It compares with 16,000 completed last year ahead of the election, when Boris Johnson claimed he had delivered record housing.

And this ignores that this Tory led Government has changed the official definition ‘affordable’ as between 60% and 80% of market rent , which reduces the public investment required but is actually unaffordable to many households on low incomes.

Changes to the mayor's housing strategy means there will no new social (council) housing schemes in London.

Thursday 22 November 2012

Join Labour's switch together scheme to save on your energy bills

The Labour Party has always believed that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone.

That's why we're organising our own collective purchasing service to help people negotiate a fairer deal with the energy companies than they can on their own.

For further information click here for Labour Switch Together

Saturday 17 November 2012

The private conversations between this Government and the City

To see why we should be worried about corporate lobbying of government view this short video produced by Spinwatch


To find out more about lobbying and the Government's response come to our meeting in Uxbridge on 28 November. Click  here for more details.

Thursday 15 November 2012

The unequal relationship in private renting

An article in this week’s Uxbridge Gazette highlights again a major problem of the current housing crisis.

The article “Mum gets notice to leave ‘damp’ home” describes a mother who shares a bed with her three year old daughter because of damp in her home. Having complained to her private landlord about the dampness and failing, in her opinion, to obtain an adequate response, the tenant approached Hillingdon Council who attempted to mediate between the landlord and tenant.  The unhappy outcome of this story is that the tenant has now, after three years' tenancy, been given two months’ notice to leave and find somewhere else to live.

Private rented housing
Without making judgements on the tenant's and landlord’s counterclaims, this example illustrates that when a tenant has a grievance with a private landlord it is all too easy for the landlord to solve ‘their problem’ by giving the tenant notice under an Assured Shorthold Tenancy agreement. The tenant has no appeal against this notice and is faced with the disruption, cost and uncertainty of having to find another home.

When Assured Shorthold tenancies were introduced in 1989 they were seen as a way of increasing the supply of rented housing for the young mobile professionals who did not qualify for social housing or were yet ready to buy.  In many ways this was successful.

More than twenty years later we now have a Government which seems bent on abolishing  social housing and many young families are unable to buy their homes due to the credit crunch. Therefore most newly forming households are left to the mercy (or lack) of the private rented sector.

As homelessness increases relentlessly the Government’s principal response has been to dismantle the homelessness safety net.  As from this month homeless families who previously have had the right to be offered a council or housing association home will have to accept private rented accommodation.  Throughout this year newspapers and magazines have carried many stories about Councils, especially London boroughs, discharging their duty to homeless families by directing them to a private tenancy long distances from their last homes.
 
The Government’s disingenuous public stance is   "It is neither acceptable, fair nor necessary for local authorities to place families far away from their area” local authorities in London are locating homeless families all over the South and Midlands in order to discharge their homelessness duties.
 
By definition homeless families for whom Councils have a legal duty are families with children or people who are vulnerable in some way.  To be ‘discharged’ into the high cost, low security private rented sector accommodation many miles from where they have lived previously, with no family support and lower prospects of employment is undermining the Government’s other policy goals of getting people on benefits into work and improving educational attainment.

Home space needed for homework
Many children in these families will have to change schools for homes that provide no long term security, risking repeated moves at the whim of their landlord and disrupted education which in turn undermines their long term life chances.
As exampled in the Gazette article, private renters too often fall victim to the decisions of their landlords. Not all landlords are bad people. Many are 'reluctant landlords' - people who find they cannot sell their home so rent it out instead. However when dealing with a tenant and a sum of money is at stake most, otherwise reasonable, people are unlikely to be impartial in an unequal relationship.

Unfortunately there are even mote unscrupulous landlords and letting agents who quite deliberately exploit their tenants vulnerablity for high fees, hidden charges and broken agreements. There are far too many complaints of unreasonable charges to renew a tenancy agreement, or refusal to return of hundreds of pounds in deposits by landlords without real justification or any accountability.
Now that private renting, historically the tenure of last resort, has become the only housing option available for many families we need to do more to make private renting a secure long term option. Better regulation can protect tenants and responsible landlords.
 
Labour is exploring a code of conduct for lettings agents, greater transparency in fees and charges and new standards people must meet before they open a lettings agency. Such rules have been in place for estate agents for a long time.
 
This is a start but only addresses the tip of the much larger problem of finding an affordable housing supply.
 
 

Friday 9 November 2012

Labour and the question of money in politics

At our next Constituency meeting at 8.00pm on Wednesday, 28 November we will be debating the issues of Introducing a Register of lobbyists and  Party Funding.

Venue: Christ Church, Redford Way, Uxbridge, GreaterLondon UB8 1SZ just a few minutes walk from Uxbridge Underground Station.

 Our guest speaker this month is Labour Party Member and Unlock Democracy's Deputy Director Alex Runswick.

LOBBY REGISTER

Lobby companies, funded by powerful commercial  interests, are accused of distorting our democracy by having disproportionate access and influence on our legislators.  

To neutralise Lobbyists influence through  transparency the Government has committed to introducing a statutory register of lobbyists. Following a public consultation held earlier this year the Government is now reviewing their proposals prior to publishing a White Paper and draft Bill during this session of Parliament.

Why and how will a lobby register work?
 
Should Trade Unions and other campaigning voluntary organisations be considered to be  the same as the commercial lobby organisations?
 
These are questions for all democratic Party Members to consider.

 PARTY FUNDING

Last year a  report on Party Funding  issued by the Committee on Standards in Public Life made  three headline proposals:

·         an annual donation cap of £10,000  from any individual or organisation including trade unions;

·         a change whereby trade union members would have to actively opt in to funding the Labour party;

·         public funding of  £3 per vote each Parliament

While the donations cap would seriously undermine the Tory Party’s funding, Labour’s initial response was opposition to the trade union member’s opt in for fear of a collapse in their own funding. All parties stepped away from the third proposal for public funding from fear of backlash from a jaundiced electorate, recently made worse by the MPs expenses scandal.

The argument in defence of trade union donations to Labour is they are made up of millions of small donations where each individual has consented for their money to be given to the party, but some commentators say that this system is often not as transparent as it ought to be.

As cross party talks on Party funding commenced In April this year, Ed Miliband made a strong defence of working people funding Labour via the annual £3 political levy and  surprised many with a  proposal for donations to be capped at £5,000, which will include discretionary contributions from the unions.  
 
COME AND SHARE YOUR VIEWS
 
This will be an ideal opportunity for members to debate these two current issues which are affecting the type of democracy in which we live.

Our meetings are open to all party members and those eligible to become party members and we welcome new supporters and interested individuals.
 
For more information email the Branch Secretary, sruislipandmanorlp@blueyonder.co.uk

Sunday 21 October 2012

Next Branch meeting 6 November

The next branch meeting is planned for Tuesday 6 November.

For more information email the Branch Secretary sruislipandmanorlp@blueyonder.co.uk

In the mean time all branch members are invited to attend the Uxbridge and South Ruislip CLP on Wednesday 24 October click here for more information.

TUC march for a future that works 20 October 2012

Saturday 20 October 2012

Ed Miliband promoting a future that works

Today in London tens of thousands of people from across Britain marched together in protest against the austerity being imposed on the country by the Tory led coalition government.

Protestors against the Government's austerity strategy marching up Regent Street towards Hyde Park

The marchers gathered in Hyde Park and amongst the many speakers Ed Miliband, leader of the Labour Party, made the following speech:

"I am here to join with people from all walks of life.
From all parts of our country.
Think about the faces in this crowd.
Young people looking for work.
Like Ashley Parsons from Wolverhampton who you saw on the film.
Let us say we stand with all the young people who want to work in Britain today.

We have nurses determined to fight for the future of our National Health Service.
Let us say we stand with them and all the men and women who serve in our NHS.

Construction workers, like Colin Roach from Greater Manchester, recently laid off.
Let us say we stand with him and people across the whole of British business who want an economy that works for them.

And all the off-duty police officers here today.
Let us say we stand with them as they seek to protect front-line policing and improve communities across Britain.

None of these people think Britain owes them a living.
They are not asking for the earth.
They just have a simple request.
They want a future that works for them.
They believe we do better as One Nation.
Private and public sectors working together.
North and South
Trade unions and British business.
A clear reference to the Andrew Mitchell affair

But they do not see that future under this government.
Instead, they see a government dividing our country.
Andrew Mitchell may finally have resigned.
But the culture of two nations runs right across this government.

They cut taxes for millionaires.
And raise taxes for ordinary families.
They leave young people out of work while the bonuses at the banks carry on.
They even have a Chancellor of the Exchequer who tries to travel first class on a standard class ticket.

It’s one rule for those at the top and another rule for everybody else: everybody like you who plays
 their part and does the right thing.
The trouble with this government is that while they are think they are born to rule, it turns out they are not very good at it.


Off-the-wall demon-stration aimed at
Michael Gove, Education Secretary,
A few weeks ago, I asked:
Have you ever seen a more incompetent, hopeless, u-turning, pledge-breaking, make it up as you go along, back of the envelope, miserable shower than this government and this Prime Minister?
What have they done since?
They’ve tried to prove me right.

Just this week:
David Cameron tried to keep his Chief Whip, even though the rest of us could see he had to go.
He made up an Energy policy on Wednesday, without any idea of how he could achieve it.
And he clings to an economic plan that is just not working.

David Cameron: a weak, clueless Prime Minister, who cannot stand up for the interests of this country.
And they are not just incompetent.
Their old answers just don’t work any more.
Trickle-down economics.
Cutting rights at work.
David Cameron calls it the “sink or swim” society.
But you don’t build a successful country with sink or swim.
You do it by building One Nation.

And that is what the next Labour government will do.
Of course, there will still be hard choices.
With borrowing rising not falling this year, I do not promise easy times.
I have said whoever was in government now there would still need to be some cuts.
But this government has shown us cutting too far and too fast, self-defeating austerity, is not the answer.
Pointing out that cuts
are preventing growth

We would make different but fairer choices including on pay and jobs.
So here is what we would do.
Day one, with me as Prime Minister, we start to give all of our young people a stake in the future.
We will tax the bankers’ bonuses and start putting young people back to work again.
We would build 100,000 homes.And get our construction workers working again.
We will end the privatisation experiment in the NHS.
And repeal the Tories’ NHS bill.
And to all the small businesses across Britain, I pledge instead of a country that serves its banks, we would have banks that serve our country.

I tell you one cut I would never make:
I would never cut taxes for millionaires while raising taxes for everybody else.

One Nation is a country where those with the broadest shoulders always bear the greatest burden.
One Nation is a country where we give hope to our young people again.
And One Nation is a country where we defend and improve our great institutions, like the National Health Service.
One Nation.
A country united not divided.
A future that works.
A future that Britain builds together

Sunday 7 October 2012

Private sector rents sucking life out of the economy


Shelter Housing charity policy team member, Peter Jeffreys, has estimated that the proportion of  private sector rents increases over inflation since 2000 equates to £8 billion per year. A large proportion of this excess has been paid to banks to fund landlords’ buy-to-let mortgages which takes money out of circulation within the economy. “If banks were re-lending this money, again it might not be a problem. But, as we’re constantly hearing – bank lending has dropped massively since 2008.”

Had the £8billion been retained by tenants it would have largely been spent on consumer goods and services which would have a significant impact on boosting the economy. Private sector tenants in London are paying on average between 42% of 46% of disposable income on these higher  rents.  This is in turn is increasing Government expenditure on housing benefits which have doubled over the last 10 years to £20 billion.

Mr Jeffreys points out that “the balance of government spending on housing has shifted from spending on house building to spending on housing benefits. Our analysis shows that if just 8% of private rented tenants moved to affordable social homes the government would recover £200 million in savings." and  recommends building affordable social homes and a reformation of the private rented sector as a means to solve the problem.

Monday 13 August 2012

Taxpayers to boost private developers profits

The Government's latest attempt to boost the building industry will transfer taxpayers money into private developers profits.  Eric Pickles, Communities Secretary, has given the green light for "expert planning brokers" to renegotiate hundreds of Section 106 planning agreements already made with Councils.

Section 106 planning agreements are a long standing arrangement which require developers to make a financial contribution to the community or provide affordable housing or infrastructure in return for planning permission. Typically the builders financial contribution will fund new road access, contributions towards new school places or a subsidy towards provision of more affordable housing to be rented by Councils or Housing Associations.

In other words developers are required to contribute towards infrastructure which will otherwise will have to be paid for from the public purse as a result of the very development from which they will make a profit. Without these agreements the developers effectively receive cross subsidy from the taxpayer for the public infrastructure which the new developments inevitably need to make them sustainable and saleable.

Since the 2007 credit crunch developers' home sales have been hit by stalled house prices and lack of buyers due to unaffordable or unobtainable mortgages. Not surprisingly many developers, who have to make a profit to survive, have put thousands of developments on hold and made even more thousands of building workers redundant. To help out the builders and increase the supply of housing the Tory led Government plans to send in the "planning brokers" to  effectively 'seal the deal' for the house builders profit needs by transferring the hidden costs of infrastructure to the taxpayer.

Who are these "planning brokers"? I don't actually know. My guess is they will be part of the same legion of private planning consultants who are normally acting on behalf of developers to arm-twist quasi-judicial local Council planning committees into accepting unwelcome planning applications with the threat of planning appeals often unaffordable for many Councils. If I am right that will be like letting the fox into the hen-house. I genuinely feel sympathy for Councillors on these Committees, being torn between their constituents' greater interests and the quasi-legal path they must tread. So what is happening to localism while central government appoints "expert brokers" to renegotiate these agreements?

Lets face it, this whole approach typifies this Tory led Government's ideology. They are putting private sector profit before the interest of the average taxpayer. This form of cross-subsidy to the developers will only help sustain unaffordable house prices, force working families who can get a mortgage into greater debt  and add further financial pressure to Councils to fill the infrastructure gap and/or reduce standards of these most basic services.

If the Government was really concerned about sustaining a vigorous building industry and a decent, affordable and sustainable housing supply they would be using any additional public sector funding to increase affordable social housing development, which already very effectively levers in private finance to minimise public sector borrowing. This would then provide employment and profit for the most efficient developers. Taxpayers would have the community owned asset of affordable rented housing, reducing the demand for private rented housing and the consequent expenditure on housing benefit (see previous post on this issue) as well as reducing pressure on the bottom end of the housing market ultimately making owner occupation an option available to more people.

Thursday 9 August 2012

Right-to-Buy costing taxpayer extra £2 billion per year

A report published recently by Sheffield Hallam University estimates up to £2 billion per year extra money in benefits through local housing allowances is being paid to private landlords of former Council homes sold under the Right-to-Buy and this money could have been better used paying for new house building.

A large increase in private rented sector has been well documented in recent years. What has not been widely recognised is the large part played ex-local authority homes in this increase.

One of the objectives of the Right-to-Buy when introduced by the Conservative government in the 1980's was to increase owner occupation. By 2012  2.5 million homes had been sold to sitting tenants. One argument in favour of the Right to Buy was that the owner occupiers would  take pride and invest in the maintenance of their homes thereby improving the characteristics of the estates as well relieving hard pressed local authorities from the maintenance responsibility. What no one really foresaw was that would lead to an increase of private rented sector.

Of course the initial sale was only the start of the process. Inevitably many Right-to-Buy owners sold on their homes for a variety of reasons. Most were re-sold to individuals for owner occupation but by 1995 it was estimated as many as 8% were being privately rented after 10 years. There is little accurate data on the percentage of ex-Council homes now being rented privately but earleir studies indicate this is more than 25% in London and 20% in Birmingham

In the mid 1990's the incentives to move Council homes into the private rented sector increased significantly through  the introduction of deregulated Assured Shorthold tenancies , greater availability of Buy-to-Let mortgages, house values rising significantly faster than inflation  and less favourable alternative investment opportunities

Despite the popular myth that Council estates are less desirable than other areas private landlords have discovered that the lower values of ex-Council homes give a greater rate of return on investment. This is in part supported by the better space standards of local authority homes, wider estate management functions undertaken by local authorities (such as grounds maintenance, dealing with Anti-Social Behaviour , communal area repairs and community development) which are not provided in other areas with a concentrated private rented sector. Added to this an unfulfilled demand for rented property in lower value , and  therefore more affordable, areas there has been an inevitable shift from owner occupation to private renting.
The higher rents in the private rented sector compared to Council rents have contributed to the increase in the housing benefit bill. Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) indicate that between 2008 and 2011 the number of housing benefit claimants in the private rented sector rose from 1.1 million to 1.6 million, an increase of nearly 50% in just 3 years. This is nearly a third of the total private rented stock in the UK.

While ex-Council stock sold under the Right-to-Buy remains a small proportion of all private rented homes, the study found that in three areas they studied in Scotland, (the only areas where the relevant data was available) it is this stock which has made up 40% of housing benefit claims in the private rented sector. This would suggest that the increased Right-to-Buy element of the expanding private rented sector is catering for the same tenant group as the original Council housing but at a much higher price for the taxpayer because of the much higher rents charged.

In a Joseph Rowntree Foundation Review of Housing 2011/12  the total housing benefit bill attributable to the private sector was estimated as £7.6billion. If the Scottish experience of private rented ex-Council housing is reflected across the whole UK the annual cost of Local Housing allowance benefit to the taxpayer is estimated as over £3billion per year with the additional cost of private sector rents compared to the equivalent Council rents as £2billion. This exceeds the receipts generated from the Right to Buy (RTB) in any year over the last 10 years.

The report concludes
" ...as the Right-to-Buy is being extended in England on the basis that it will generate new income for housebuilding. What we have shown is,that in fact, the RTB has resulted in growing annual revenue costs to the Treasury that may well continue to exceed receipts generated from new sales. If the government has billions of pounds to spend on housing it might make more sense to spend it on new housing supply rather to invest it in a tenure change and continuing housing shortage in key locations"





Sunday 29 July 2012

Claude Moraes MEP visits Uxbridge & S Ruislip CLP

Claude Moraes MEP
Several branch members attended a meeting of the Uxbridge and South Ruislip Constituency LP on 25 July with Claude Moraes, Labour MEP . Click here for a short report on the meeting

Thursday 19 July 2012

Hillingdon Tories block limits on betting shops


Cllr Peter Curling
Labour Councillor Peter Curling writes “Once again, the Tory group in Hillingdon has proved that their marketing strap line of “Putting residents first” is precisely that, a marketing strapline, and one with absolutely no substance.


At the full Council meeting on Thursday 5th July the Labour group tabled two motions, one asking the Cabinet to reconsider their decision to close three day centres for the disabled.  Not surprisingly the Tory group put their party whip before the residents and voted down that motion.


The other motion was for the Council to support the Government commissioned, Mary Portas  (otherwise known as Mary Queen of Shops) review of High streets and the High Steets First campaign led by Cllr Rowena Davis (Southwark Council) in their efforts to get planning law changed so that the council can control the number of betting shops in town centres.




Given our continued economic slump and an economy that has flat lined for the last 2 years, there is real concern that of betting shops on our high streets are exploiting people’s desperation for a way out of poverty, giving rise to payday loan companies and creating a trickle up movement of money moving from the poor to the rich.



Other boroughs and campaign groups are now working together to force a change in the law. Under current planning law betting shops are taking over vacant high street units with their existing A2 classification meaning they don't need any planning permission. This is because betting shops, according to Planning Law, are listed as “financial services”.

Labour Councillor Lynne Allen proposed the motion and made it absolutely clear that we are not against betting shops per se and that our concerns are centred on clusters of Bookies which are said to hamper work around regeneration by discouraging businesses from moving into the area and making it difficult to create a more diverse and vibrant high street.



Mary Portas made a recommendation in her review that would have changed the classification of betting shops and placed limits on their numbers.  campaign also calls for the government to change the law in order to give local communities a say over the number of betting shops in their area.

During the Mayoral election campaign Boris Johnson indicated his support for these campaigns by saying:

"We certainly should be making it easier for councils to block them (bookmakers) - they're not only spreading false hope, they're reducing the economic vitality of high streets. Bookmakers are a spiritual narcotic that breed false hope and it's a terrible thing to see."

It was therefore very sad to see the Tories speaking against the campaigns to curb the proliferation of betting shops and by doing so they actually started arguing that clusters of betting shops and the encouragement of gambling was a good thing. 

Rather than put the residents first in this debate, the Conservative group put their need to play pointless party political games in the Council chamber, before any commitment to the residents that they were elected to serve.

Saturday 23 June 2012

Friday 1 June 2012

Margaret Hodge: I'm Nobody's Fool on HS2

This brilliant short video produced by StopHS2 campaign amusingly  sums up the (lack of) business case for the government's plan for a high speed rail track from London to Birmingahm and beyond.

The video highlights the role of  Margaret Hodge, Labour MP for Barking, as Chair of the Public Accounts Committee in steadfastly challenging offciials who are promoting the HS2 project.





Wednesday 30 May 2012

Next branch meeting Wednesday 6 June 2012

The next branch meeting is scheduled for 8.00pm Wednesday 6 June 2012.

For more information on the venue and agenda email the Branch Secretary for more information. sruislipandmanorlp@blueyonder.co.uk

Saturday 26 May 2012

Hillingdon Labour oppose Day Care cuts

Hillingdon Labour Group have expressed their full support for the parents, carers and service users in their campaign against the closure of Day Care Centres in the borough.  Lawyers representing the families of severely disabled adults in Hillingdon are taking legal action in the High Court to stop the closure of three day care centres.

In a recent statement to the press the Council said

The proposed changes will enable service users to have more choice and independence through offering care and support tailored to their needs”.

Hillingdon Labour Councillors fundamentally disagree with the Council's closure programme because they recognise that such closures result in less choice for disabled residents by removing the option for the purchase of the centre’s tailored services with the scheme of personal budgets that now fund services for severely disabled people.



A recent report on ITV's London Tonight programme highlighted the problems that the users and their carers will face if the Council's plans for closure go ahead. 




Far from putting residents first this move is driven by the financial savings achieved by the day centre closures, which were identified in the 2010 draft of the 2011 budget.  Labour’s proposed amendments to the 2012 budget were financially neutral and included the retention of Woodside day centre but this was rejected by the Conservatives.

Cllr Peter Curling, Labour Group Leader said “People with serious disabilities now have personal budgets so that they and their carers can choose what services they wish purchase to meet their specific needs.  I therefore find it a bizarre move for the council to stifle this choice by closing the day care centres which already provide the tailored support that many people with severe disabilities and their carers wish to purchase.”


Cllr John Major, Labour Lead on Social Services, Health & Housing, added “The closure of the day cares centres is something that I had feared for some time.  In 2010 I raised a question regarding what was meant when the council put forward a package of savings described as, A modern approach to enable choice to change delivery from a traditional approach, to supporting people to access more community services. When I sought clarification on this it was confirmed that this was connected to the closure of day centres.










New Hillingdon Labour Group Leader first statement

Councillor Peter Curling
On 8 May 2012 Councillor Peter Curling, one of three Labour ward Councillors for Townfield, was elected Leader of the Hillingdon Labour Group. A few days later Councillor Curling wrote for the Uxbridge Gazette:

"For every day since this Tory led Government took office, 625 public service jobs have been axed bringing untold hardship to countless families. On 3rd of May we saw people throughout the country go to the polls and express their deep dis-satisfaction with the Tory led Government resulting in Labour making huge gains up and down the country.  The London Mayoral result came down to the big “marmite” personalities of Ken & Boris, rather than the usual party politics and the Boris Bounce was just enough to push him back into the Mayoralty, more a victory for “Boris” brand than an endorsement of the Conservatives.

The election of the GLA Assembly Members saw Labour overturn a 28,000 Tory majority here in Ealing and Hillingdon where Dr Onkar Sahota replaced the former Deputy Mayor, Richard Barnes.  The London-wide party list candidates also saw a huge swing to Labour.  This now means that although Boris is the Mayor of London, the assembly has a majority of Labour members. Unfortunately it’s not the two thirds majority required to kerb the Mayor’s actions or amend the Mayor’s budget, but it does mean that there are more Labour members on the assembly to scrutinise and hold the Mayor to account.

Looking at local issues I am sure that a significant factor to the swing to Labour in Ealing & Hillingdon was the government’s plans to close Ealing Hospital as part of the top down reorganisation of the NHS that David Cameron specifically promised not to do.  So how fitting it is that the winning Labour candidate is a Doctor who is committed to supporting and defending the NHS. Labour is the only party that supports our great British institutions, like the NHS, the only party who will keep our public services public.

<><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><>
Labour campaigning to save Ealing Hospital
The Tory led coalition abandoned their mantra of “we’re all in it together” (if we ever believed it!) when they decided to cut the tax of the wealthiest and richest in our society whilst mercilessly cutting benefits and life-lines to some of the poorest and most vulnerable.  They have reverted to type and taken a deeply unfair approach to our economic problems, their policies of tax cuts for the rich and increasing the burden on the poor have clearly failed.

The recent elections have sent a strong message to the government; The country has had enough of Tory austerity, of out of touch and no hope policies that have dragged us back into recession.  We want to prove that in tough times you can depend on Labour to fight for you, we will put residents first and we are determined to prove that in the coming months.




Saturday 5 May 2012

Stunning victory for Labour GLA candidate

Newly elected GLA member
Dr Onkar Sahota
Dr Onkar Sahota has made local history by winning the Ealing and Hillingdon seat for the London Assembly for the Labour Party for the first time.

Labour’s Dr Sahota defeated Conservative Councillor  Richard Barnes by 3,110 votes, overturning a majority of 28,638.

 Dr Sahota, an Ealing GP and Hayes resident, said: "We have had a mountain to climb but we fought a good campaign."

<><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><>
Candidate name
Party
Votes
Votes %
Majority
Onkar Sahota
Labour Party
65,584
40.04
3,110
Richard Barnes
Conservative Party
62,474
38.14
Michael Cox
London Liberal Democrats
11,805
7.21
Mike Harling
Green Party
10,877
6.64
Helen Louise Knight
Fresh Choice for London (UKIP)
6,750
4.12
David Furness
British National Party
4,284
2.62
Ian Edward
National Front Putting Londoners First
2,035
1.24
 Source: London Elects
 Total number of good votes
163,809
100.00

The defeated Conservative Councillor Richard Barnes, had been the GLA member for Ealing and Hillingdon for 12 years and was Boris Johnson’s Statutory Deputy Mayor from  2008 until 2012. He continues to be a L.B. Hillingdon Councillor for the Harefield ward.

Unfortunately Ken Livingstone, after a hard fought campaign, narrowly failed to regain the London Mayoralty for Labour.