Brent Labour Group punish John Duffy, outspoken Brent councillor - Labour whip removed

Cllr Duffy

In a dedicated meeting of Brent Labour Group held on Monday maverick councillor John Duffy  was deprived of the Labour whip for an indefinite period.

In what one informant described as an ugly meeting reminiscent of a kangaroo court, Duffy was accused of  bullying and bringing the Labour Group into disrepute.

Cllr Butt's allies ensured that a compromise proposal, for a shorter period, was defeated. Duffy's recent criticism of Brent's CEO, Carolyn Downs, appeared to have played a part in the move as well as his revelations concerning Brent's management of its waste services. LINK

Duffy, who was not selected by Labour for the May 2018 elections, has just only six months left as a councillor.

I do hope that this does not prevent Cllr Duffy continuing to speak 'Truth to Power' despite "Power' trying to silence him.

What kind of whipping will Brent councillors have on Monday?

Following the internal row over Brent Council Labour Group's vote in favour of a Council Tax rise of 1.99% in order to save a number of important services, which was then dismissed by the Labour leadership as a straw poll which they did not have to take account of, there appears to be some shifting of position  ahead of Monday's Full Council Meeting.

Cllr John Duffy has complained to the Constitutional Officer of the Labour Party about the vote disregard LINK and I understand there is anger among backbenchers about the situation.

Now Cllr Sandra Kabir, Labour's Chief Whip, has made a statement to the Kilburn Times LINK which is not exactly a model of clarity but may indicate tolerance of a possible 'rebellion':

The Times reports:

The full council will vote on the cuts next Monday but councillors are under no obligation to vote.

Cllr Sandra Kabir, Brent Council’s chief whip, told the Times: “Nobody can be forced to vote against the budget they don’t want. But the budget was made starting from August, over the summer, over many, many sessions with the councillors, so everyone is very aware of what’s in the budget.”

Asked if councillors would be disciplined if they voted against the cuts she said: “Not necessarily no.”

Powney: Cabinet's 'blatant disregard makes everyone involved look ridiculous'

 

Front page of this week's Kilburn Times

Former councllor James Powney takes up the issue of the Labour Group vote in favour of a Council Tax rise, and the leadership's decision to ignore the vote in his blog LINK

Cllr John Duffy has made a formal complaint to the Coinstiutional officer of the Labour Party over the issue.

This is what James Powney said:

Reports of the discussion of Council Tax increases cause me some embarrassment as a member of the Labour Party.  It seems that the Labour Group debated and voted on the issue, deciding in favour of a rise just short of what would trigger a referendum.  This seems eminently sensible to me for reasons I have explained. 

It now appears that the Executive plan to simply ignore the majority of the Group, and freeze the Council Tax.  I have never heard of such a thing in Brent or in any other authority, or indeed any other party.  Such blatant disregard makes everyone involved look ridiculous.

It is normal for Budgets to be subject to Group whipping, but since the majority voted in favour of an increase, I would have thought the Labour whip is in favour of the increase rather than against it.

Councillors' allowances to be increased at next Council meeting plus who will Labour appoint as Tory leader?

There will be a Full Brent Council meeting on September 8th, only the second since the elections in May.  The first proved controversial with constitutional changes voted through and then later backbench concern about what had been agreed - especially the reduction in Scrutiny committees.

The meeting was noteworthy also for the public split in the Conservative opposition with the three Tories in Brondesbury Park declaring independence from those in Kenton.

That issue will rear its head again when the Council (56 Labour, 6 Tories and one Lib Dem) vote to decide which of the two Tory factions should be the Principal Opposition Group for the purposes of allowances. Perhaps Central Office will mediate before they expose themselves to ridicule.

Fiona Ledden's paper on allowances that will be put before the Council includes increases in allowances but Ledden claims that they remain some of the lowest in London and below those recommended by an independent review.

The recommendations (previous allowance in brackets) include:

The basic allowance for all 63 councillors £10,000  (£7,974)

Additional Allowances

Following the replacement of the Executive by the smaller Cabinet, the two allowances saved will be shared amongst the Cabinet members £18,711 (£14,969)

The Leader of the Council £38,964 (£35,222)

Deputy Leader £28, 397 (£24,655)

Chief Whip majority party £5,473 (no change)

Two additional Deputy whips for the majority party are proposed £2,113 where their majority exceeds 50%.   Previously there were whip allowances of £5,473 for the other two parties. They appear to have been abolished.

Group leader of the Principal Opposition  £12,658 (no change but no deputy principal oppositon group leader allowance.)

Principal Opposition  Group Allowance £2,113 (n/a)

There are a number of other allowances, many of which remain unchanged,  that can be found on the Council website HERE

There are clearly debatable issues such as the additional whips for the Labour group but as someone who has been  a trade unionist since the age of 16 I am not going to fulminate against these proposals. It is right that people should get the rate for the job and carried out properly these are very responsible positions.

However, as an electorate we know that there is varying performance by councillors in terms of the effectiveness of their casework, including basic tasks such as responding to correspondence and attending surgeries, as well as issues around Cabinet and Committee members making sure they have read and understood the relevant papers thoroughly.

Furthermore there have been problems around attendance records at Council meetings in the past and we deserve our councillors' full-time commitment to their job.

Most workers go through appraisal procedures and teachers are now subjected to performance related pay. Perhaps councillors should be accountable to an annual ward citizens' panel between elections to ensure that they are giving value for money?

That is why the Recall proposal of the Make Willesden Green Campaign in the local elections, which the Green Party alone of the parties contesting the election supported, was so important. 

Above views and any responses to comments are in a personal capacity. The Brent Green Party has not yet discussed these proposals. 

More democracy 'wherever practicable' suggests new Labour councillor

As the Labour Group meets this morning there are signs of some disquiet over the changes in Scrutiny. However, concentrating minds even more in the context of concentrating power, is the proposed amendment to Labour Party Standing Orders which would abolish annual elections. This would leave Muhammed Butt in the leadership position until the next local election,

In a Twitter exchange with former councillor James Powney, newly elected councillor Tom Miller asks, "What stake for backbenchers, one might ask?'

Powney replied that it was open to the Labour Group to defer the decision.

Tom Miller responded, 'One for closed doors I am sure, but I know which way I fall on democracy issues - more of it whenever practicable...'

Let's hope the rest of the Labout Group agree with Cllr Miller today - not just on annual elections but Scrutiny. Perhaps he might even suggest that abolition of the whip would go some way to provide more democracy 'whenever practicable'.