Barnet Strategic Planning Committee - Is it fit for purpose ?

 I am a sad git - I know it , I have been for years. 

Last Thursday December 4th and this past Monday December 8th I sat through the meetings of the Strategic Planning Committee of Barnet Council, admittedly remotely from the comfort of my own living room with a cup of coffee and a box of After Eight mints. 

Now no normal person would submit to 4 hours of a Council Planning Committee (each meeting lasted 2  hours) unless they had too . Pity the nine Councillors who sit on the Committee (six Labour and 3 Conservative ) . The Labour Group have as their representatives a Group of Pensioners Councillors  Barnes , Cohen, Khalick, Roberts and Farrier none of whom will see 70 again presumably chosen for their experience and Planning expertise and their ability to just about stay awake during meetings . Additionally the Labour Chairman, or Chair of course in woke Barnet is Councillor Nigel Young . Now Councillor Young is an interesting man . A newly elected Councillor for Childs Hill Ward in 2022 he was straight away appointed Chair of the Stategic Planning Committee and has actually chaired it very well particularly when faced with a baying mob in the public gallery as he was during the meeting held earlier this year which dealt with the ridiculous application to build a Football Stadium for Barnet Football Club on Playing Fields they did not even own and the Council had no intention of selling to them. More about Councillor Young later in this blog !

The Conservatives have as their representatives Councillor Richard Cornelius (now an elder Statesman but still annoyed at being forced to give up the Leadership of the Council to the Welsh Reform upstart Councillor Thomas ) . Do not rule out a Leadership comeback from our Richard ! Then there is Councillor Josh Mastin- Lee a worthy and earnet successor to the late much missed  Councillor Eva Greenspan (who knew her Planning having done it for 35 years and spoke up for her residents and always topped the poll in her Ward as a result ) and finally Councillor Shuy Gordon the quiet , clever yet understated son of the late Councillor Brian Gordon 

Now Council Planning Committees are quasi judicial Committees ( as the Chair reminds us at the start of each meeting) so that the usual shenanigans of Local Government and Politics are strictly forbidden . In particular Councillors cannot be whipped and must vote according to Planning law . That is the theory anyway.

However in the last couple of years several applications across Barnet on a scale not seen since the late 1960s with the Grahame Park Estate have come forward notably "Edgware towers " the redevelopment of Edgware Town Centre , the redevelopment of North Finchley Town Centre and the constant threat / proposals from Transport for London to build on Station car parks.

The attitude of the ruling Labour Administration in Barnet has been to "Build baby build " and no matter what public opposition from Residents Groups or in the case of Edgware Towers, the London Fire Brigade have stopped the Labour members of the Planning Committee voting in favour of applications . The attitude can be seen by the Council Officers recomemendations . Officers always take their "steer" from leading Members especially the Chair of Planning and the Cabinet member responsible for Development (or whatever the current title is ) .All the major applications to build in Barnet in the last couple of years ( with the exception of the Football Club which had other considerations ) have come before Committee with an Officer recomemdation to approve . 

So imagine my surprise nah shock when Labour Members joined their Conservative colleagues in voting down the application for the Leisure Way development in Finchley last Thursday and the High Barnet Station Car Park development on Monday refusing the Officer recomemdation to approve. Suddenly all those worthy arguments troted out by Labour Councillors about the need for more social and affordabe housing were instantly forgotton .My shock was nothing compared to the Planning Officers who were clearly furious and having had their advise rejected on Thursday lost patience on Monday, indeed the Director started bullying the Committee into giving far more detailed reasons for refusal than normal . Indeed the mildly spoken Councillor Gordon who no doubt had a hot dinner waiting for him at home , said "We are not usually asked for this much detail in a refusal ".

The Leisure Way development was stage two in a three stage planning process to completley change North Finchley . This ill advised process was started by the previous Conservative Administration and enthusiastically pursued by the current Labour Administration. The first stage was to build on Lodge Lane N12, North Finchley car park the development to include a small cinema and an 8 lane bowling alley clearly intended to replace the facilities on Leisure Way . Despite huge resident opposition and not just from the usual NIMBY brigade the Labour Group voted the application through . 

So what has changed between the Committiee meetings held to determine Edgware Towers and Lodge Lane and the Committee meetings held to determine Leisure Way and High Barnet Underground ?

Well several answers to that . First the "Chair" of Stategic Planning the aforementioned Councillor Young has gone on the "Chicken run" abandoning his Childs Hill Ward which is looking like a probable Conservative Gain and getting selected to replace the ailing Councillor Cooke in Woodhouse Ward in North Finchley which surprise , surprise contains the Leisure Way Development and vast numbers of objectors .

Secondly local Labour Members of Parliament are getting increasingly jittery about trying to hold their seats in the light of the huge unpopularity of their Government and Prime Minister . Hence Sarah Sackmen wrote a letter , she was far too busy to turn up in person and address the Planning Committee, objecting to Leisure Way . It was a very very long letter ! 

Third and foremost the Labour Party in Barnet have woken up to the fact (reinforced bythe collapse in the Labour vote in the recent Hendon Ward byelection )  that they are possibly facing wipe out in May 2026 Local elections ( 1968 all over again for those of you with long memories ) from a combination of the Conservatives , Reform and even the mad Greens and are now backtracking on the desperatley unpopular "Build baby build " strategy .

So what happens now ?

Well of course these two developments go to the Mayor of London who can use his powers to direct Barnet Council to grant Planning permission . I would put my pension on the fact  that he will do just that but probably not before the Council elections in May in order to spare Barnet Labour Group blushes . 

So what is the point of Barnet Council Strategic Planning Committee ? You may well ask !

Life at the top!

There are many weird and wonderful traditions on Barnet Council some of which have been in place since the Council was set up in 1965 others which have "developed" over the years and most of which add to the efficient running of the Council or the gaiety of Civic life or both.

One tradition that used to exist was that the immediate past Chief Executive's official portrait was hung in the corridor outside the Chief Executive's office. Leo Boland ended this tradition in 2001 when he ordered the removal of Max Caller's portrait from the Town Hall on the grounds (quite rightly) that Officers on the whole should remain anonymous and it is elected  members who should take all the glory.

Max Caller was the Chief Executive of Barnet Council when I was first elected and therefore I have judged all subsequent Chief Executives of the various public bodies I have served on against him.

Before Mr Caller, Barnet had a Town Clerk, a lawyer who was a semi God like figure to staff and indeed Councillors. The two previous Town Clerks, Mr Williams and Mr Bennett, I don't even think their wives addressed them by their Christian names, still have there names painted on certain old statutory notices in parks and allotments with the phrase "by Order of the Town Clerk" etc... etc... and in their day it was by order !

Max Caller was not a solicitor in fact he was an extremely accomplished engineer who made his name in Barnet as an efficient Borough Engineer (a title now sadly replaced by some meaningless Assistant Director post ) and was the first to use the title "Chief Executive" because in those days the title "Town Clerk" needed a legal qualification . However he made up for this by wearing the Town Clerk's wig and gown on every possible civic occasion. Mr Caller whose post Barnet career took him to Hackney and briefly Haringey and earned him a CBE is now running the Local Government Boundary Commission and last time I saw him (inevitably at a funeral) was busy deciding the fate of the Councillors of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea who unwisely have requested a re-drawing of Ward Boundaries .

In the days before e-mail Councillors wrote letters to Officers about constituents issues and no matter how trivial the matter a Councillor always received a reply signed by Mr Caller in his distinctive green ink. Woe betide an Officer who was dealing with a member and did not keep the Chief Executive in the loop! Some considered Max a control freak I thought he just had a huge capacity for hard work, a knowledge of the Council second to none, an understanding of the pressures on Politicians, a first class brain, an ability to serve whomsoever the electorate had given him to work with and a remarkable attention to detail. So, what if he supposedly occasionally lost his temper, he never did with me and indeed was always willing to guide and encourage new Councillors. He did however drive Politicians of all Parties mad (from Lady Thatcher downwards) by his inability to finish an election count before the Western Isles constituency. Sadly this is another Barnet tradition which still exists!

Max was succeeded by the modernising Leo Boland (no wig and gown for him) whose expertise on strategy and policy development meant some of the attention to service delivery  detail shown by Mr Caller and important to most councillors and the public was left to others. Leo was a Chief Executive for the post 2000 Local Government Act, which created the dreadful Cabinet system era whereas, under Mr Caller Councillors of all Parties who phoned the Chief Executive were put through under Mr Boland the Chief Executive would "phone you back when his meeting had finished".

However Leo's wide knowledge of Local Government thinking and ability to interpret "New Labour" Government policy direction lead the Council to fundamentally examine how it was going to do business in the future. The disadvantage is that constant reorganisations seemed to promote the Marxist theory of revolutionary chaos and Councillors often had no idea who was responsible for certain services from one week to the next. Traditional Council  Officers (nicknamed men in cardigans by the Chief Executive) departed in droves with their pay-offs and pensions. Mr Boland was a Chief Executive who could deliver change and hence I was a passionate supporter of his appointment as Boris Johnson's Chief Executive at City Hall in 2009, an appointment that sadly ended in tears, but that is a story for my forthcoming book.

Following Mr Boland came Nick Walkley. I did not serve on the Appointment panel , I do not think the then Leader trusted me to make the "right" decision and there was some disquiet amongst the ruling Group who perceived the new Chief Executive as far too close to the thinking of the Labour Government, he had spent a year on secondment at the Department of Communities and Local Government and far too susceptible to whatever Local Government fad was in favour that week, whatever did happen to "Total Place". Some less Charitable Conservative Councillors considered him the then Leaders "puppy" no doubt as a result of his habit of nodding his head enthusiastically during the Leaders speeches, but as he also did it during my speeches and indeed during virtually all members speeches I put it down to an in built politeness to elected members. I was however dubious that car owning Barnet could have a Chief Executive who did not drive !

But Mr Walkley proved to have balls and a surprising respect for Civic Life. His insistence that Council Directors should escort Councillors at Remembrance Day wreath laying ceremonies across the Borough and should fork out of their own pockets for tickets to the Mayor's Charity Dinner was a welcome change.

However it was clear that despite his strength of character and the most disgraceful and personalised abuse by the sad , mad and the thoroughly nasty (and supposedly angry) , all was not well in the State of Denmark, (I am fond of my Shakespeare) and the shock amongst Councillors at his sudden departure and for Haringey of all places is palpable. Perhaps they are old fashioned but some Councillors apparently think that for 200,000 a year a certain amount of loyalty to the Borough would not have been out of place. 

Having been appointed by an Administration lead by a radical and reforming Conservative Leader (Mike Freer) there is a theory that Mr Walkley was not as comfortable with a more traditional Conservative Leader determined not to throw out the baby with the bathwater who is more relaxed with Government at all levels doing less and achieving more .

Somehow I do not think Mr Walkley's portrait will be appearing on the wall of the Town Hall soon................

As for the future, does the Borough need a Chief Executive? After Leo Boland left City Hall the post was abolished, where Boris leads, Barnet should follow. On the other hand Max Caller is always open to a new challenge, green ink and all !

We still have his portrait in the attic I believe!

The health of the Conservative Party

Last week I attended the Executive Council of my local Conservative Association and along, I suspect, with most Local Conservative Associations we discussed the state of our membership and the number of "lapsed members" who had failed to renew. One member had not sent his subscription in after 40 years membership apparently over the Prime Minister’s support of Gay marriage.  Sadly this is symptomatic of the state of the Conservative Party on the ground. The ever loyal membership and activists many of whom have not recovered from the removal of Mrs T 20 years ago are passionately anti Europe , pro a crackdown on Immigration, think benefits should be cut quicker and deeper than IDS is proposing and would cut Overseas Aid . Oh and they hate Liberals with a large or a small "L".

Many Councillors (increasingly the backbone of Conservative Associations) are dismayed by the lack of the promised freedoms of the Localism Act and the constant snipping at them from the DCLG and the Taxpayers Alliance. The proposed changes on planning rules around extensions has for many Councillors, ever mindful of the views of their local residents and amenities Associations led to despair.

The members do not feel any “ownership” of the current Government. Whilst Cameron’s popularity declines amongst the middle aged and older activists, they feel nobody is listening and they do not know what to do. Often their entire social lives revolve around the Conservative party and they therefore have no intention of defecting to UKIP (even if their cross goes there in the next Euro election). They love Boris, especially in London , although unlike say Jeffrey Archer or Norman Tebbit whom they also adored in their heyday, Boris refuses virtually all speaking requests from Associations and indeed often suggests his Father!

Most activists had no idea who Baroness Warsi was when serving as Party Chairman and long for the return of a Cecil Parkinson type figure with charm and charisma.  

What is to be done? The Prime Minister needs the membership and the middle classes to fall in love with him as they did with Lady Thatcher 30 years ago. It can be done, just concentrate on those issues which every Tory MP hears month after month raised at their Executive. 

As published in House Magazine – Conservative Party Conference supplement