City of London Council Debates Black Cabs At Bank Junction: Shravan Joshi Does A U Turn – Keith Bottomley, James Thomson & Michael Snyder Make Misleading Statements

In the full meeting of the City of London council on 20/6/24, the moral bankruptcy of this tawdry institution was fully exposed to the public, with political U turns, contraventions of standing orders, officers’ partiality, elected members’ irrational and misleading statements and masonic influence.

Mason Edward Goodchild, Clockwork Liveryman Jani Levanen, Plastic Man Gerard O’Sullivan & Barrister David Williams Stand In Farringdon Within City Council By-Election

On the same day as the national election in the UK on 4 July 2024, there is a local council by-election in the City of London’s Farringdon Within ward. Below we provide a rundown of the four candidates – Edward Goodchild, Jani Levanen, Gerard O’Sullivan and David Williams. All are standing as ‘independents’. There is […]

Prem Goyal Caught Raffling Off His City Councillor Perks

We’ve had cause to mention City council members perks in various posts and it has come to our attention that Portsoken councillor Prem Goyal has been re-distributing at least some of the gratuities he can claim as an elected square mile politician to voters in his ward. Goyal is the only councillor we are aware of who raffles these perks off to his ward electorate. Instead of ingratiating himself with his constituents by offering them the chance of getting freebies at the council’s expense, Goyal should be doing his job and representing Portsoken residents in things that matter – like not having their lives blighted by inappropriate development and having their homes properly maintained. His voting record on these matters is appalling.

City Of London Council Leaders Face Rare Dissent Over Plan To Award Themselves Substantial Extra Allowances

The plan of the leaders of the City of London council to award themselves substantial extra allowances has faced rare dissent from generally compliant elected members. An internal consultation has revealed that “diversity” is viewed as cynical cover for advancing the leaders’ agenda, the Town Clerk has become the leaders’ mouthpiece and adopts passive-aggressive tactics towards members who disagree with them, and even a masonic member admits that the masonic presence in the council has caused a lot of problems. We predict, however, that the leaders will still try to push through a revised proposal that gets those at the top most of what they want by way of extra allowances.

City of London Council Leaders Propose That They Be Paid (A Lot) More – While Their Social Housing Tenants Shiver In Poorly Insulted Homes & Face A Rent Hike

Over the last few years, the leaders of the City of London council have quietly been preparing the way for a proposal that has now emerged – that they be paid substantial “special responsibility allowances” on top of their existing substantial perks and privileges. These same leaders have refused to spend a single penny of the council’s “City’s Estate” fund (formerly called “City’s Cash”) – out of which their “special responsibility allowances” will be paid – on accelerating the renovation of the council’s relatively small housing estates, which have fallen into disrepair due to decades of neglect, which is in turn due to decades of poor leadership. So City tenants shiver in winter because window replacements that have been overdue for decades remain on the council’s “to do” list, while the payment of “special responsibility allowances” to the leaders are to be implemented “as quickly as possible” in the 2024-25 financial year.

City Of London Councillors Edward Lord & Christopher Hayward Try & Fail To intimidate Reclaim EC1 & Councillor Philip Woodhouse

Lord and Hayward have demanded that our criticisms of the council, which they call “attacks”, “disgraceful”, “abusive”, etc, “MUST STOP”. It is they who need to stop, or be stopped by other members fearful of the harm they are doing to the council by these public outbursts in which they project their own negative behaviour on to those exercising their democratic right to comment on local politics in the City of London.

Ongoing Injustice At The City Of London Council

The City council’s so-called “independent persons” accepted a malicious and politically motivated complaint about Councillor Marianne Fredericks, and recommended to the council’s elected members that she be censured for being “discriminatory” towards mothers, although she is a mother of four and has done more than anyone else for mothers in the Guildhall. The elected members voted in an unprecedented secret ballot by 58 to 30 in favour of that recommendation, with 11 abstentions. We speculate that the 58 members who voted in favour included: the leadership, who are determined to uphold their authority at all costs, including fairness to an individual member; members who support them to achieve political advancement; members who pay little attention to most council business and habitually follow the herd; members who are jealous of Marianne’s achievements; and most of the aldermen, who often vote as a block. This latest scandal in the City council raises issues about the continuing viability of an institution that is becoming ever more dysfunctional. The need for urgent and radical change is obvious to many outside the Guildhall, and to an increasing number within it, but apparently not to the council’s leadership, who continue acting as if they were in a masonic lodge.

On The City Of London Council’s Toxic Culture, Bullying & The Maladministration Of Its Code Of Conduct

At a City of London council meeting in January, councillor Simon Duckworth said “we have a practice and a principle of not criticising members in public. It is not the sort of behaviour that should be seen in a public body.” The City council is a local authority whose members are supposed to be (but are mostly not) democratically elected to engage in democratic politics, and that entails criticism of the actions of other members. Imagine the public derision that a member of parliament would incur by saying that “we have a principle and a practice in this House of not criticising members in public…”

Patricia Ann Holmes & The Fight To Save The Museum Of London Site From Overdevelopment

If someone like Ann Holmes is prepared to vocally stand against the City council’s proposed redevelopment of the London Wall West site, there must be considerable disquiet among other Guildhall establishment figures too. Policy chair Chris Hayward is clearly a major diving force behind the plans to replace the museum building and Bastion House with two massive office towers, but whether he can carry the entire council with him remains to be seen. Hayward’s links to the construction industry seem to result in him being unable to think or act objectively on overdevelopment. Let’s not forget he failed to declare various conflicts of interest when, as chair of planning, he voted in favour of granting Taylor Wimpey permission to build Clarendon Court/The Denizen.

Mark Wheatley, Chris Hayward & The Recommendation To Retain The Guildhall’s William Beckford Slaver Statue

Reuters ran a story yesterday about an apparent City of London council U-turn on the decision to remove slaver statues from its Guildhall headquarters. This was picked up initially by Eastern Eye and then by UK national rags The Times and The Telegraph. The Reuters template for the piece was only subjected to minor tinkering before appearing in different outlets. What the media to date has failed to pick up on are the political backgrounds of those on the council committee that made the recommendation, something a diligent and unbiased journalist would have reported.

RECLAIM EC1

No To Business Votes, Yes To Democracy!

Ann Holmes