GeorgeI really believe it is within the gift of any residents' association to invite or not invite councillors to their meetings as they see fit, and I certainly have no desire to force myself upon NITA or any other such group. It is after all the sign of a well-run organisation that it can operate successfully without interference by councillors, MPs or any other outside influences.My problem where NITA is concerned (and I have told this to individual members in conversation) is that it clearly adjusts its level of co-operation with elected members according to which party or group those elected members happen to represent, which has the effect of alienating large numbers of residents when the association's brief should be to serve them all equally.When Isleworth South (as was) had three Labour councillors, they received the full co-operation of the NITA committee. When I was elected the policy was only to work with the other two councillors. Now there are three non-Labour councillors in Isleworth ward there is no contact whatsoever between us and the NITA committee - a situation which I regret but which is entirely of NITA's choosing, not of ours.I have been informed by individuals who are on the NITA committee that this situation has been and is being actively encouraged by Hounslow Homes, and that the association believes its own relationship with that organisation would suffer if it was to change. If Hounslow Homes is behind it then the Labour Party is behind it, which makes a mockery of Alan's offer to Simon to try to bring the various parties closer together. Some users of this forum may be aware that a few weeks after I was first elected the Director of Housing at the London Borough of Hounslow, Chris Langstaff (now Managing Director of Hounslow Homes), wrote to me to inform me that I could not expect the same level of co-operation from himself and his department as other elected members, despite the fact that political impartiality in the conduct of his work is a condition of his terms of employment. Mr. Langstaff has never rescinded this policy despite having been asked for clarification on a number of occasions, and two Chief Executives have allowed it to continue unchallenged.It is my view that Hounslow Homes' activities on Ivybridge are a reflection of Mr. Langstaff's own personal policy towards community councillors, and that the purpose of them is to make it more difficult for us to operate in the role which we were elected to perform.The problem is exacerbated, but not caused, by the presence of Labour Party members on the NITA committee whose loyalty to their party would by definition take precedence over any commitment which they may have to their community. One of these party members is Chris Boucher, who is also a Labour prospective candidate for Isleworth and a Tenant Board Member for Hounslow Homes (hopefully users will appreciate from this just how incestuous this whole set-up has become).As I stated earlier I would be happy if Alan was able to bring the various parties to the table and thrash out some means of working together for the common good, but the facts outlined above will hopefully go some way towards explaining why I suspect this is not his motive. My gut feeling is that he will instead be looking for ways in which to try to drive a wedge between Ivytag and the elected members so as to weaken both and thereby to strengthen the hand of Labour/Hounslow Homes on the estate, but I would be happy to be proved wrong. We will know next week.
Phil Andrews ● 7135d