GarethThe reason I didn't respond to Ruth's original posting was because was in effect an imputation without any substance. If Ruth has any evidence, even circumstantial evidence, that Knox D'Arcy has any connections with the Conservative Party or the ICG, or that it has donated towards our funds (if only!) or assisted us in any way, then she should share them with us. If there is no such evidence, then the implication should not have been made.The issue from which Ruth was trying to deflect attention was, of course, Labour cronyism. John attempted to mitigate this by suggesting that the cronyism was as natural to the Conservative Party as it is to Labour, but I can only act on the evidence of my own eyes and I have to say that thus far I have witnessed no such thing.That the New Labour ethos centres upon cronyism and a general policy of "jobs for the boys (and girls)" cannot seriously be contested. Indeed it will be noted that even Ruth hasn't tried to contest it. It is a matter of historical record that the ICG was formed, not with the pursuance of an ideological objective in mind, but as a counter to Labour cronyism on our estates in Isleworth. It was the continuation of this cronyism which sustained the ICG beyond its first election campaign in 1994 and which led to the election of an ICG councillor in 1998, of three ICG councillors in 2002 and of six councillors, with a resultant change of administration at Hounslow for the first time in 35 years, in 2006.Have any lessons been learned from the rather severe consequences which Labour has suffered as a result of its policy? Anybody who was present during the recent Hounslow Homes Review would have to conclude that they haven't. A grotesquely disproportionate amount of time was spent arguing about the problems on one particular estate which have come about as a direct result of Labour cronyism and control-freakery, and what to most normal people would appear to be a self-evidently reasonable aspiration - that all our tenants should have a fair and equal right to participate in the management of their estates irrespective of political affiliation or opinion - provoked an hysterical and orchestrated response of such ridiculous proportions that it even led to an attempt to bring down the administration which involved, amongst other things, a question to the Prime Minister in the House of Commons!With regard to Knox d'Arcy, this company was taken on to undertake the first phase of the review following an interview process which was conducted by members of both political groups which are represented on the Executive, as well as by officers of the council who were employed under Ruth's administration. There was nothing remotely secretive or underhand about the process. When the time comes to decide who will be taken on for the second phase the correct process will, once again, be followed. I am sorry that Ruth's approval was not sought before we embarked upon the project, but in the fullness of time she will come to understand that that is one of the prices to be paid by her party for being booted out of office by the electorate.Whilst I can understand some of the concerns which have been expressed, the continual reduction in our settlement from the government has left us with very little option. The alternative, to put it bluntly, would be to cut frontline services and to increase Council Tax above the rate of inflation, not just this year but every year. This has been New Labour's way, possibly because so many of its members are employed by the local authority. It is not ours. Our priority is, and always will be, to protect those whom we were elected to serve.The Conservative manifesto at the last local election pledged to try to curtail increases in Council Tax. Ours promised to make savings by cutting waste and trimming unnecessary bureaucracy in preference to targeting the most vulnerable. The current review flows naturally from both. Gareth raised the question of "natural wastage", and I am advised that last year this amounted to 302 persons - fairly much the number of posts which it is envisaged will be trimmed as a result of the project over a two-year period. That should give us some sense of perspective. It is my sincere hope that this process can be organised in such a way as to minimise the need for compulsory redundancies and it is of course entirely possible that they could be avoided completely, but in the final analysis the council exists to serve its residents and not the other way around.I believe that a restructuring of the local authority, conducted thoroughly whilst at the same time sympathetically, is the right thing to do for our long-suffering residents. It is perhaps significant that few of them seem to be amongst the ranks of the objectors.
Phil Andrews ● 6716d