DECENT HOMES DEBACLE: 2010 Pledge to make "make every council home warm, dry and safe" by 2016 is GONE and not refreshed. Non-decency is currently about c.50%. Peter John now uses past tense to claim that "we led the way in London..to..make every council home warm dry and safe."
Homes at the Aylesbury, Heygate and elsewhere have been sold out of the HRA, and many homes will never be decent (Decent Homes is part of Warm, Dry & Safe).
NEW KITCHENS AND BATHROOMS DEBACLE: (or how to save Simon Hughes MP)
Southwark Labour pledge "We will deliver a quality kitchen and bathroom for every council tenant."
Now, only a few days later the truth emerges with a programme that is "starting" and with no end date.
What is the truth?
Many residents will not get a new kitchen or bathroom, they will get selected repairs - if they are lucky, because most will not get anything anytime soon.
Why was this foolish? Telling people on the doorstep "vote for us and you'll get a new kitchen and bathroom" enables the Lib Dems, to knock on Council home doors next year 2015 and ask "have you got a new kitchen or bathroom" Answer will be "no". "Oh. "you can't trust Labour. Vote for Simon". What a gift!
Stand by for a three year delay!!!
"The next four years, we will go further still by increasing quality affordable childcare, making swimming and gym use free for all residents"
That is a 4 YEAR time frame.
All through the recent election campaign the public on SE1 or on Twitter asked for clarification. When? How? Who? Etc. And go NO response.
So now we begin to know the truth.
The electorate will not be forgiving of those who make promises and then fail to keep them: or rejiggle words to slip out of it.
Cheer up Lib Dems. Southwark Labours gimmicks may just have saved your MP!
Party politicians just can't help themselves. Finally its all about winning - entirely selfish - and tribal excited chanting "4 more years", yes, that is likely to be the end in 2018 - sooner or later!
The more I hear/see of Peter John, the more I object.
Old news, but I've just found it he is the chairman of the governors at Riverside primary, probably the best primary school in Southwark. Is that a coincidence? As leader of the Council, doesn't that place him in direct conflict?
Sorry you feel that way - don't think we've ever met.
But I simply don't understand this reference to Riverside Primary? I've been a governor at the school for nearly 20 years, and Chair of Governors for about 15 - long before I ever became a councillor. I am extremely proud of the staff and pupils at the school, who each year produce amazing results.
I would have thought that is something which is good - not something to be sneered at?
I'm sure you're proud of the school's achievements. With respect, I'd say that's probably more down to the fact that there's a very able head teacher (two in fact these days, I believe) running things on the ground.
However, how does that enable the governing body of the school to determine to take issues with the local authority over issues - as I'm sure it does in the course of its everyday business - when you, the governing body's chairman, are also leader of the council? There must be a conflict of interest. I accept you may have been a governor there before your councillorship, but I don't think it's appropriate for you to continue. There's more here
I should add that my children don't attend Riverside and never have done, so I don't have any axe to grind. On the contrary.
You are absolutely right - the Headteachers at Riverside are outstanding, and together with the staff deserve all the credit for the amazing performance of the school.
But I still don't get your other point. The school is still maintained by the local authority and as such is part of the local authority family. It is rare for there to be issues where the school is in disagreement with the authority, but when that does arise I clearly act in my capacity as Chair of Governors, not as Council Leader.
I can't help feeling your argument is driven by an attempt to have a pop at me rather than any genuine concern for the school. And that is poor politics.