Myths - local Councils are a new idea in Tower Hamlets, we have not had one here for several hundred years so this page is about dealing with any potential mis-understanding
Churches - not since 1894 has there been any link between local government parishes and church parishes. There is no link to any religion nor should there be.
Poverty - the view of some is that the Isle of Dogs is a rich area and full of bankers. That ignores several facts including that the truly rich do not live here but in places like Chelsea, there are parts of the Isle of Dogs with high levels of deprivation and that local Councils raise their own money, they do not stop Tower Hamlets Council from raising or spending money. Historically the Isle of Dogs has raised extremely large sums of money for the rest of Tower Hamlets in business rates, s106, New Homes Bonus and Community Infrastructure Levy money.
Business taxes - local Councils cannot tax businesses, only residents.
That it will take money from poor people - no, it will increase the money available for public services, see Queens Park Community Council. Some of the confusion comes from the Community Infrastructure Levy. Money paid by developers to the Council for new and replacement infrastructure. That money cannot be spent on day to day services only on infrastructure or things which support the development of the area. Tower Hamlets has already made the committment to spend 25% of CIL locally so the local Council would not change this the amount, only maybe change what it is spent on. More information here.
That local Councils are political - generally many local Councillors do not represent a national political party, they stand as independents or under another banner like the estate or group they represent, altough the larger the local Council the more likely you will find political parties participating. But the issues that local Councils have to deal with are best dealt without the tribalism and division that modern British political parties sometimes bring with them. I would hope that no political party stands candidates badged as their party in local Council elections. That does not stop the member of a political party from standing but that they ask electors to vote for them based on their contribution to the community not their party.
That local Councils are not democratic - it can be hard to find people who want to be Councillors in a local Council, they do not have a lot of power historically, are usually not paid to do the job, or a have a lot of money to spend so sometimes there are not enough candidates to ensure elections. You need an election to choose between competing candidates. This is also true of some other areas where one party is so dominant that opponents do not bother putting up opponents. As a result there are no elections and no democracy it is alleged. But rival candidates can stand. I believe that a local Council of the right size, with real powers and a large budget will attract a lot of people who wish to be Councillors which means elections to choose between them.
That it will replace Tower Hamlets Council - no, this will supplement Tower Hamlets Council by providing more capacity. The Council will retain its responsibility for everything it does now. There is a lot of evidence of main authorities working well with local Councils.
That the Labour Party do not support this - wrong, at a national level there is lots of evidence that the Labour party support the principle of local government and it is a 2007 Act of Parliament that allows us to do this. If anybody suggests this ask them to produce evidence.
That it will cause division - between 1986 and 1994 Tower Hamlets was run by the Liberal Democrats, they practised decentralisation whereby power was devolved to seven different areas. But from 1994 the Council returned to a centralised top down style of management with all decisions made from the center. This article describes the issues well www.independent.co.uk/voices/bad-neighbours-in-bow-1389333.html
The local Council is an attempt to merge the two models. Big decisions made centrally, local decisons made locally. I think that is the ideal combination.
That it is divisive - there are some 10,000 local Councils in England and Wales plus more in Scotland, there is no evidence that they cause division from outside of Tower Hamlets. We already have internal boundaries within Tower Hamlets for a range of issues e.g. wards, planning boundaries (tall building zones, opportunity areas), CIL boundaries, GLA set Opportunity Areas so this would be one more boundary. Other areas can also set up their own local Councils which maybe the ideal solution across Tower Hamlets.
Poverty - the view of some is that the Isle of Dogs is a rich area and full of bankers. That ignores several facts including that the truly rich do not live here but in places like Chelsea, there are parts of the Isle of Dogs with high levels of deprivation and that local Councils raise their own money, they do not stop Tower Hamlets Council from raising or spending money. Historically the Isle of Dogs has raised extremely large sums of money for the rest of Tower Hamlets in business rates, s106, New Homes Bonus and Community Infrastructure Levy money.
Business taxes - local Councils cannot tax businesses, only residents.
That it will take money from poor people - no, it will increase the money available for public services, see Queens Park Community Council. Some of the confusion comes from the Community Infrastructure Levy. Money paid by developers to the Council for new and replacement infrastructure. That money cannot be spent on day to day services only on infrastructure or things which support the development of the area. Tower Hamlets has already made the committment to spend 25% of CIL locally so the local Council would not change this the amount, only maybe change what it is spent on. More information here.
That local Councils are political - generally many local Councillors do not represent a national political party, they stand as independents or under another banner like the estate or group they represent, altough the larger the local Council the more likely you will find political parties participating. But the issues that local Councils have to deal with are best dealt without the tribalism and division that modern British political parties sometimes bring with them. I would hope that no political party stands candidates badged as their party in local Council elections. That does not stop the member of a political party from standing but that they ask electors to vote for them based on their contribution to the community not their party.
That local Councils are not democratic - it can be hard to find people who want to be Councillors in a local Council, they do not have a lot of power historically, are usually not paid to do the job, or a have a lot of money to spend so sometimes there are not enough candidates to ensure elections. You need an election to choose between competing candidates. This is also true of some other areas where one party is so dominant that opponents do not bother putting up opponents. As a result there are no elections and no democracy it is alleged. But rival candidates can stand. I believe that a local Council of the right size, with real powers and a large budget will attract a lot of people who wish to be Councillors which means elections to choose between them.
That it will replace Tower Hamlets Council - no, this will supplement Tower Hamlets Council by providing more capacity. The Council will retain its responsibility for everything it does now. There is a lot of evidence of main authorities working well with local Councils.
That the Labour Party do not support this - wrong, at a national level there is lots of evidence that the Labour party support the principle of local government and it is a 2007 Act of Parliament that allows us to do this. If anybody suggests this ask them to produce evidence.
That it will cause division - between 1986 and 1994 Tower Hamlets was run by the Liberal Democrats, they practised decentralisation whereby power was devolved to seven different areas. But from 1994 the Council returned to a centralised top down style of management with all decisions made from the center. This article describes the issues well www.independent.co.uk/voices/bad-neighbours-in-bow-1389333.html
The local Council is an attempt to merge the two models. Big decisions made centrally, local decisons made locally. I think that is the ideal combination.
That it is divisive - there are some 10,000 local Councils in England and Wales plus more in Scotland, there is no evidence that they cause division from outside of Tower Hamlets. We already have internal boundaries within Tower Hamlets for a range of issues e.g. wards, planning boundaries (tall building zones, opportunity areas), CIL boundaries, GLA set Opportunity Areas so this would be one more boundary. Other areas can also set up their own local Councils which maybe the ideal solution across Tower Hamlets.
