Barnet’s DIY war memorials

Tory-run Barnet Council is the home of ‘easy council’, the idea that council tax payers pay extra to get the standard of service they should already be getting by default, and has come up with a new money saving idea!

In a report published last month Barnet Council has decided that it will not be responsible for the update of the borough’s war memorials to include the names of service men and women who gave their lives since the memorial was built. Any proposed additions must be paid for by those who want the names added and there must be no additional maintenance costs.

It doesn’t stop there. Barnet Council is also insisting that the research to validate the names is done by the proponents. Although the council has a budget for its war memorials, it is obviously not planning to spend any of it on updating the memorials.

The report, which involved seven council officers (and therefore probably cost more than the proposed additions), was signed off by Barnet’s commercial director under delegated powers. The fact that Barnet’s Tory administration allowed this is symptomatic of their hands off approach to running the borough.

The same approach manage to lose them £27.4 million pounds in Icelandic banks when it was found that over 80% of the investments made had been contrary to Barnet Council’s own treasury management strategy. The cabinet resources committee then chaired by the former council leader  Mike Freer, now Tory PPC for Finchley & Golders Green, totally failed to ask even the most basic questions about where Barnet Council’s money was invested.

The failure to honour our war dead therefore comes as little surprise. After all under Barnet’s model of local government they are simply an extra to be paid for by some one else.

Duncan Macdonald is a councillor in Barnet and blogs here.

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in Local government and Op-eds.
Advert

4 Comments

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarMichael BG 18th Aug - 2:35am
    @ Joe Bouke “A startling statistic is the projection of 250,000 extra households a year until 2033.” I have not seen this forecast. I had...
  • User AvatarMichael BG 18th Aug - 2:33am
    @ Nonconformistradical “On what do you base your choice of arbitrary cut-off year?” If I can justify 1971 is it arbitrary? 2017-67+21 = 1971 You...
  • User AvatarLorenzo Cherin 18th Aug - 1:10am
    John writes a very clever and interesting piece, we could do more of this, radical centre stuff and get somewhere with a slate of policies....
  • User AvatarLorenzo Cherin 18th Aug - 12:59am
    As ever terrific responses from Katharine and Catherine, we need you both , and do not want this absurd policy idea to water down our...
  • User AvatarLorenzo Cherin 18th Aug - 12:48am
    Three contributions show why my kind of approach here , centre ,centre left , radical and moderate centre , centre left , is the essence...
  • User AvatarLittle Jackie Paper 17th Aug - 11:09pm
    frankie - On contracts etc - The Posted Workers Directives are a big problem though. See here, p27 and p36-40 in particular http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/579001/IPOL_STU(2016)579001_EN.pdf If some...