|
|
 |
| |
What really went on at Town Hall ‘riots’
• CNJ readers will want to know what really happened on the night of the so-called ‘riots’ at the Town Hall against this last round of council cuts (Fresh protest over nursery, March 15).
They weren’t riots, we just wanted to be heard. Local press coverage referred to the possible prosecution of some who were there. But many think that the council acted recklessly by shutting the community out of a public meeting where cuts and privatisation affecting us all were being voted on.
The protest inside the Town Hall started after over 100 people from the local community – pensioners, single mums, disabled people of all ages including wheelchair users, women workers defending services for black parents and young people with special educational needs, asylum seekers, council employees, and others – were prevented from entering the council chamber, including one of its public galleries, to support their official deputations.
Instead of being welcomed, we were met with printed notices on the doors saying “Councillors Only”. A few of us managed to go into one of the public galleries with an earlier deputation and saw that two-thirds of the galleries were empty.
When those of us outside asked why we weren’t allowed in, security guards told us it was for health and safety reasons and that they would set up a video link up in a nearby room. Half an hour later nothing was set up and we were told they couldn’t do it after all. None of the councillors had the courtesy to come and tell us what was happening.
Everyone felt we had a right to hear our deputations and the council’s deliberations, and chanted: “Let us in”. Security guards aggressively manhandled people, including women, regardless of the young children and vulnerable older and disabled people nearby.
Some people at the front managed to get into the chamber and then two lots of police were called. Those who had got in were forced out under threat of arrest. Council workers who had been part of the demonstration outside the chamber, left in fear for their jobs.
But most of us stayed put and finally our delegations of mums and women with disabilities were allowed in, though without their supporters.
The council has complained that the Mayor’s gold mace was thrown onto the floor. But no one was hurt, while the decisions made that night have life-threatening consequences for those affected.
As the delegations explained, pensioners with disabilities can’t afford to pay for homecare and will have to choose between cutting back on eating or on homecare.
We are disgusted that the majority party councillors cheered when they voted through the budget, cutting those with least while awarding themselves a 2.5 per cent increase in their basic allowances bringing it up to £9,304.95 a year, £27,675 for the leader of the council, and £15,375 for the leader of the opposition.
Those in charge of implementing these decisions get obscenely high wages with a 29 per cent raise last year bringing it to £145,200 for the director of Social Services, Housing and Adult Social Care, and £139,000 for the Children’s and Families director
The cuts were made without regard to the legal requirement to consult and every attempt was made to keep the community out of a meeting that should be public. Advice is being taken as to whether this was illegal.
WinVisible (women with visible and invisible disabilities)
Mothers and children from Kilburn Grange Playcentre
Camden Black Parents and Teachers Association
All African Women’s Group
Anna Alston, member, Young People for Inclusion
Eve Grace, member, Disabilty in Camden Management Committee
|
 |
|
|
|
