 Jules
Regains Crown
By Rab MacWilliam
Jules Pipe has been re-elected as Mayor of Hackney, so
I thought I’d wander down to talk to His Worship in Mare Street
and ask him for an update about what’s going on.
He appeared affable and relaxed and, for the first time in our
meetings, his minder Polly was absent. So it was just the two of
us. I asked him why he thought the turnout for the Mayoral election
had increased. One factor was that both Council and Mayor elections
were held at the same time (unlike 2002) and that people are now
used to having an elected Mayor. Modestly, for a politician, he
disclaimed personal responsibility and added it was ‘because
we did what we said we’d do… we succeeded in keeping
the focus on local issues’ (ie away from Charles Clarke, Prescott,
Blair, the Iraq War and all the other New Labour fiascos).
Then on to the Nike situation. As is now well known, the multinational
corporation nicked the Hackney Council logo and printed it on a
range of shirts, trainers and footballs, among others, without asking
permission from the Council, to establish ‘street cred’
before the World Cup (you’d imagine that Nike would have had
more ‘cred’ with, say, a South Bronx logo, but who knows
what goes through their minds). This was ‘appalling from a
company so protective of its own logo’. I then asked if Hackney
had ever bothered to copyright or trademark the logo. The brief
silence that followed implied that they hadn’t, but the rules
about ‘passing off’ are probably enough to ensure that
Hackney win any potential legal case. ‘I understand we are
covered’, said Jules. The perceived association with the arrogant
sportswear giant also worries Jules, who perceptively noted that
‘their reputation is even worse than ours’ (a close
call). Hackney is claiming a share of the profits, which is apparently
earmarked for local youth sports groups.
We glide seamlessly on to the Clissold Leisure Centre. I mentioned
that nothing seems to be happening on the building and that there
are rumours that the cost has now gone well over the promised £6.1
million. Jules informed me that ‘most of the current activity
is internal works’ and ‘if the roof is more expensive,
then Hackney will have to pay more out of its Capital programme.
It will not affect the Council Tax’ (so where does the money
for the Capital programme come from?). He claimed that the refurb
is problematic because of dispute and disagreement between the various
contractors. But, Jules, you’ve had two years to institute
an effective project management programme. He sighs, almost wishing
the whole thing would go away. ‘This has been a nightmare
from start to finish. It is just horrendously complicated. It is
so depressing that a project can face so many problems.’ I
felt like tucking him up in bed and giving him a nice cup of tea,
but persisted with my questioning. So when’s it going to be
ready? ‘Winter’. So can I assume January or February?
‘I would imagine so’. Readers of a philosophical inclination
may be reminded of Zeno’s Dichotomy Paradox. The rest of you
can look it up on Google. Feeling unable to inflict any more torture,
I turn to another subject.
Specifically, the reported £70 million spend on doing up
the Town Hall. Jules perks up. Apart from the fact that this sum
represents ‘a lot of double counting from the Tories and based
on 2008 figures’, £25 million is to be spent on a new
office block immediately behind the Town Hall to centralise staff
from across the Borough, while another £10 million is allocated
to Stokey Town Hall, Assembly Rooms and Library (he phones me up
later, when I’m in my office in the Rochester Castle, to tell
me that the work in Stoke Newington should take about three years).
So where is the rest of the money going? The Mare Street Fortress
needs substantial expenditure – apparently the wiring dates
from the 1930s; there is one lift, also from the 1930s which when
a part fails, it has to be specially rebuilt; disabled access is
virtually impossible; there are mice everywhere; and so on. So this
will cost. However, the good news is that the sale of the existing
Council properties, as well as the disposal of some valuable land
the Council owns in the City, will cover the net cost and will not
come out of the Council Tax. ‘This is all about serving residents
first and it can’t be done with the existing facilities’.
So that’s all right, then.
 Then
we move on to the Stoke Newington CPZ parking issue, which incenses
virtually every trader in the area, who believe their businesses
are being badly affected. I ask Jules that, as he has agreed to
a review well in advance of his legal requirement to do so, does
this not indicate that the Council has made an error of judgment.
This being the case, why not rescind all the parking restrictions
– thereby giving the traders some breathing space –
until the review has been completed. ‘It can’t be done’.
Why not? ‘We would have to refund money to the residents who
have paid for permits and the Parking Department would not like
it. No-one here wants to see a downturn in Church Street, or failures
but we have to find a balance. There is no easy solution.’
Finally, with time running out, we discuss the two-way proposal
for the High Street (‘getting rid of Rectory Road is a good
thing but I worry about parking off the High Street’) –
the answer, Jules, is in your hands; the irony that Hackney CCTV
is based in Stokey Town Hall and that there are hardly any cameras
in the area (there are several more planned); and the new community
policing (‘their visibility has definitely contributed to
a fall in street crime’).
I leave the Town Hall, as usual pretty much convinced of Jules’
personal sincerity but questioning the ability and competence of
Council officers to carry out the boss’s apparent vision for
the future of Hackney. I hope I’m wrong. |
