Fighting apathy and extremism

Up to the 1990's Hackney had one of the lowest voter registration counts in the Country. Nowhere was this more true than in the old Brownswood wards. "Typical of many inner city areas", it might be said. True, to a certain degree. Obviously there are deep-rooted problems of disproportionate transience, social and economic exclusion, understandable cynicism and alienation.

But much was done subsequently to encourage as many people as possible onto the voter's list. Now it looks as if those glaring gaps in registration are reappearing, just like the prevalent rubbish tipping and dereliction. This is no complaint against the invariably assiduous and cheery foot-sloggers of the Electoral Registration Unit. But isn't it strange how their efforts are concentrated on those areas where the Labour administration in Hackney Town Hall might be expected to have the greatest electoral interest.

Whatever spin to the contrary, Labour has always subsisted on low expectations, low levels of political engagement, low voter turn-out. This has been an open invitation to the British National Party and other extremists in parts of London and elsewhere to fill the gap. In advance of the European elections and the threat of BNP representation through sheer inertia, it is going to be vital to boost voter registration and confront those who would provoke inter-community hostility, especially in such diverse areas as Finsbury Park and Manor House.

The disgrace of Woodberry Down

This is what Sarah Marsh, member of the Brownswood Liberal Democrat 'Focus' team and resident on the Woodberry Down Estate, wrote to the 'Hackney Gazette' last week:

"I'm sure many people on the Woodberry Down Estate are angry and frustrated at reports that the long-promised regeneration scheme there may be stalled yet again. Nevertheless, it's rather misplaced for Councillor Coggins, the Conservative group leader on Hackney Council, to claim that the estate is so "notorious" that it will scare away the developers and bankers on whom funding is supposed to depend. After all, in this crazy world of Mr Bean economics, it's these same developers and bankers who depend on funding contributed by the taxpayers - including, of course, the residents of Woodberry Down themselves! If Woodberry Down is "notorious", it's certainly nothing to do with the residents who have struggled for decades against neglect and mismanagement from the Town Hall."

And this was the 'Gazette' editorial a few days later:

"More worrying is the billion pound Woodberry Down plan in the north west of the borough. The ambitious plan, hatched up in brighter economic times, is to demolish 2000 crumbling flats and replace them with a mix of more than 4000 council and private homes as well as community facilities over the next fifteen years......If Berkeley Homes, the prospective developers, pulled out, the local authority would face a tough time finding another partner and would then face the prospect of having a massive unbudgeted liability to restore the remaining blocks. Town Hall chiefs insist the project is long-term and will be completed. The 'Gazette' certainly hopes so for the patient people of Woodberry Down who have lived far too long in overcrowded and substandard living accommodation"

Minds alike! Talking to long-time community activists on Woodberry Down like Debbie and Klaus and Josie just met by chance on the pavement, morale is rock-bottom. So much for a decade of false promises and dithering bureaucratic mismanagement by Hackney Council. They're not going to get away with this one.

'Talking Point': public censors, private carers

'Talking Point' by Councillor Ian Sharer, leader of the Liberal Democrat group on Hackney Council:



"Over recent weeks I have been searching my copies of that bizarre publication 'Hackney Today' for an apology to Iain Sinclair. Alas, in vain. New Labour doesn't do apologies - except, of course, where there are easy votes to be garnered.


"It may be recalled that Iain Sinclair is the Hackney-based author whose wonderfully evocative description of local life and characters, 'Hackney: that Rose-Red Empire', was published earlier this year. In its wisdom Hackney Council banned its presentation on council premises ........... perversely since excerpts were already being read in a regular BBC radio series! The subsequent public outcry led to the inevitable and graceless climb-down.


"What intrigued me were the reasons given for this ham-fisted censorship. There seems to have been a consensus that the author's well-known stand on the damaging impact of the Olympics juggernaut was responsible. I'm not so sure. In a telling comment one fortunately nameless council officer argues that publicity for the book should not be supported because "it actively promotes an opinion which contradicts our aims and values as an organisation”. That phrase, so redolent of bureaucratic arrogance and self-defensiveness throughout the world, sent a shiver down my spine. Come off it, this is Hackney Town Hall, not the boardroom of a rapacious international conglomerate or the central committee of some arid post-communist statelet.


"The problem, it seems to me, is that 'Hackney: that Rose-Red Empire' gives some very realistic snapshots of Hackney life, instantly recognisable to most Hackney residents, stimulating in their perception but uncomfortable and sometimes unnerving. This is not the stuff of good corporate image.


"However Hackney Council is not a self-contained business organisation. It is, believe it or not, a democratic institution representing the people of Hackney and accountable to them. All too often it's easy for councillors and officers to lose sight of that elemental fact. In the days when every barmy political project had the ready support of Hackney's "loony left", it was "their" money they were spending on "their" ephemeral schemes - and, incidentally, "their" right to censor opinions disagreeable to them. Now it seems we've gone to the other extreme in which the corporate ethics of big business and the international banks prevail, yet still with the same arrogance and contempt for democratic accountability.


"There are great dangers when an organisation becomes too inward-looking. We have seen the disastrous results in neighbouring Haringey. At the present time it is more important than ever to be actively responsive to the needs of that very complex society that makes up Hackney – so well described, of course, in ‘Hackney, that Rose-Red Empire’. How many Hackney people, for example, are working usually unrecognised as carers for others. Many are under great economic pressure, yet they are the backbone of our local community. So it was disappointing that my own proposals that would have helped carers of mentally disabled people were rejected by the Labour administration in this year’s council budget debate. This is a claim that I feel fully justified in continuing to press."

Brownswood: a Saturday afternoon in March

It was a lovely afternoon to be walking down Blackstock Road. Spring definitely in the air and at last a really good result at the Emirates. Wonderful how many small children there are with shiny red and white scarves. A reminder of days past in the 'Family Enclosure' at the old Highbury Stadium. My own youngsters earned their pocket money for a month picking up the coins that irate Millwall supporters were hurtling towards the North Bank.

And a lovely afternoon to be round and about. So many residents planting flowers, sprucing up window boxes, tackling overgrown foliage. Yet also, dishearteningly, the equally evident signs of "public squalor": boarded-up windows, piles of garbage, dangerous pavements, overflowing recycling bins. Local people don't deserve this. It's time to get to work!