‘The Havering Residents Association working relationship with Labour has consistently voted against ULEZ.’
Havering Residents Association respond to Councillor David Taylor’s column in the Havering Daily.
In response to Councillor Taylor’s remarks, in his article entitled “Our Council has failed to prepare for ULEZ”, it’s important to clarify several points. Firstly, Councillor Taylor appears to overlook the GLA Act 1999 and the powers this has given the Mayor to enact ULEZ, as well as the legal advice that Havering Council received. It’s worth noting that the court case challenging ULEZ implementation did not succeed.
Furthermore, our new administration has been diligent in making savings, including reducing Member allowances and eliminate Special Responsibility allowances introduced by the Conservative party for all their Members.
The new administration have made further savings through restructuring the council and closer working relationships with partners. Returning to the Budget Setting process that took place in February, the Conservative budget proposal formulated by Councillor Taylor, was rejected by Members of his own group and some or his own Group Members failed to attend the most important meeting
of the year.
The H.R.A working relationship with Labour has consistently voted against ULEZ, demonstrating our commitment to opposing it and voted to “stop ULEZ at the Extraordinary meeting held in August for the second time. In contrast, it’s essential to highlight that the Conservatives did not aim to stop ULEZ in their motion; instead, they focused on criticizing the Mayor stating “condemns the Mayor”. We continue to firmly believe that there are no valid grounds for ULEZ to be introduced in Havering.
Councillor Taylor’s perspective appears to be a lone voice, seldom visible during campaigns,
offering more words than actions. It might be beneficial for him to reconsider his priorities and urge his government, to which he is a part, to take measures addressing the issues faced by our residents, such as poverty, foodbank reliance, fuel poverty, inadequate social care funding, and high interest rates. It is time for him to acknowledge the real challenges our residents encounter and the power his own government possesses to rectify these injustices, including the matter of ULEZ.
Stay up to date with all of our latest updates and content by following us on our social media accounts!
We have created community pages where we will share our up-to-date stories happening in the area. Add the area closest to where you live.
Support Local Journalism
We at The Havering Daily appreciate your support of quality journalism. Your generous donation, no matter the size, allows us to continue bringing unbiased and informative news to the community. Your contribution helps us maintain our independence and allows us to continue providing high-quality journalism. Thank you for valuing the work we do and for supporting our mission
Thank you
Discover more from The Havering Daily
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Cllr Taylor is a spreader of disinformation. His view on proceedings are skewed and he twists the narrative to suit himself.
Information is taken out of context, misrepresented and sent out to social media and online newspapers.
It is never the whole truth, it is a deception.
If he spent half the time he currently spends attacking the administration doing something positive, or God help us, actually helping the administration with positive comments and actions, we could achieve a lot more (Why would he do that though? He claims he is trying to help, by pouring fuel on a fire)
I believe David is looking to make a name for himself and become an MP
He will climb over anyone he needs to in order to get there.
I urge readers who follow his writing to check facts, ask the question is this really true and if necessary ask whomever he is attacking for their side of the story.
There is a difference between being against and opposing something, a difference between words and actions.
The Mayor was never going to listen to words so only legal action could delay ULEZ and potentially stop ULEZ as the politics change and the more councils involved the better politically and the cheaper legal costs per council.
The Council Leader (HRA) had made a political decision NOT to join legal action irrespective of the costs as he thought wasting council tax-payers money on a “lost cause” was simply the wrong thing to do! How does a RA councillor justify wasting money after saying Havering has no money? Or perhaps because of Labour protests?
Except legal action, even failed legal action, isn’t a waste of money as potentially delaying ULEZ until the Mayoral elections could stop ULEZ and save the council over £80,000 in enforcement fines on ‘non-compliant’ council vehicles, as well as the many other ULEZ harms. Particularly, after the council had voted unanimously against ULEZ.
I agree costs are an issue, but the Council Leader (HRA) never asked council officers about the likely costs, hence why none were published. Instead at the Extraordinary ‘ULEZ’ Council meeting on 30th August he just guessed and said legal action would have cost Havering over £250,000.
I agree an alarming figure, but a false claim as even if this outlandish figure is correct it has to be divided by the number of councils involved.
My own suggestion was for Havering to offer the other councils a small contribution to be part of the action and it’s likely they would have agreed as they were going ahead anyway and would welcome the cross-party support.
The Council Leader (HRA) refused to do so which is evidence he was against legal action irrespective of the costs involved, but opposing legal action is de facto the same as supporting ULEZ.