Ealing and Northfield Ex-Mayor Livingstone

Gazette can’t add up

On page 2 today the Gazette carries comments from opposition leader Sonika Nirwal regarding the small rise in council tax signalled by council leader Jason Stacey (see previous posting). Both the Gazette in its headline and Nirwal in her quote try to slur the new administration with the word hypocrisy. What a load of twaddle?

In the pre-amble to the Conservative manifesto for the local elections in May we identified one of our programme focuses as:

Keeping council tax as low as possible. Cutting out the massive waste at Ealing Council and delivering true value for money for the council tax already paid by residents.

In the main body of the document we say:

Year on year a Conservative run Ealing Council will hold council tax to levels as low as possible.

This is exactly what we are doing. That’s called delivery not hypocrisy.

If you wonder about the Gazette’s reporting you should certainly worry about their maths. They take five year’s worth of percentage rises and add them up. To have any mathematical sense they need to be multiplied. Doh! I pointed this out on 24th February when they first used the figures like this (see previous posting).

The tables below are constructed straight from my council tax bills since 1999. They show the excruciating rise in council tax Band D in Ealing during the early years of this century driven by the wastefulness of both the old Labour administration and the London Mayor. Ealing council’s charge has gone up 71%, the GLA precept by 175% (ie 2.75 times) and the council tax (which covers both of these) has gone up by 86%. Note how both the Mayor and the Labour council tried to control their rises in election years (election years highlighted in red).

Ealing's Council Tax

3 replies on “Gazette can’t add up”

I have yet to see any of this: “Cutting out the massive waste at Ealing Council”. Most successful companies encourage a turnover of staff annually to cull out the “jobs worth”–for example Microsoft (euphemistically) “lets go” six per cent of its workforce annually to keep them keen and mean– I have yet to see anyone “let go” by Ealing Council since the Conservatives were elected–I won’t say “took over” as Unison seems to be fairly and squarely in control.It seems to me that it would be a good idea to have a “name and shame” a council official/employee/contractor that has failed to deliver, been rude, unhelpful, corrupt, etc. Let’s see if anyone dares to do that in response to this comment!


“Most successful companies … cull …” – rubbish

A number of people have left the council since the change in control in May but it really doesn’t help anyone to make a song and dance about it.

We have few people that fail to deliver and still fewer who are rude or unhelpful. As for corrupt you will be hard pressed to identify any cases at all. There are many improvements to make at Ealing but most, pretty much all, of them will be achieved through the people that you are doing down.

If all you want to do is be negative please stop posting. If you have interesting comments, thoughtful analysis or new ideas then please join in.


Point taken (about negativity). The “Microsoft Cull” — not rubbish. Big piece about this in the business press….

Comments are closed.