Principles? What principles?
Watching the meeting of Enfield council last night from the public gallery was a salutary and depressing experience. We were there to see whether the council would declare Enfield to be a Fairtrade Borough, but before we got to that there was a motion put by the two newly-elected Save Chase Farm councillors committing the council to supporting Chase Farm's A&E unit - something which all parties have declared themselves in favour of. You might therefore have expected - and the Save Chas Farmers specifically wanted - a council united and a unanimous vote. No such luck.
The Tories, irked by the loss of a couple of seats to Save Chase Farm and always ready to upset Labour, had come up with a cunning plan. They threw in an amendment criticising Joan Ryan for not arranging a meeting with the Secretary of State as the council had (unanimously) asked her to. It was an entirely reasonable criticism on the face of it, but that wasn't the point. They knew that Labour couldn't support it under the abstruse rules of the political game. You or I could have supported it - or at least shrugged our shoulders at it - but we're not politicians. We would have kept in mind that what was important was that Enfield needs an A&E at Chase Farm, and voted accordingly. For politicians, though, the whole and only point is to look better than your opponents (even if that means just looking slightly less ridiculous than they do). So Labour duly voted against the amendment, and when it was carried anyway they voted against the amended motion. The poor, bemused Save Chase Farmers (I bet they're looking forward to the next four years!) ended up abstaining on their own motion as the vital unanimity had gone. They were the only ones to emerge with any honour from the whole affair, with the possible exception of Vivien Giladi who did at least make some conciliatory noises - but still voted against what she believes in. I thought there was a minimum age limit for standing for the council - how did all those 12-year-olds get in?
And so to the Fairtrade debate, which was apparently one of the longest with the greatest number of speakers in living memory. It started in confusion though, as there were both a recommendation from the cabinet to defer the decision until their 'concerns' about the 'financial implications' could be addressed, and a Labour motion to accept the recommendations of the Working Group that had considered the implications, i.e. to declare Enfield a Fairtrade Borough without further ado. In the end the cabinet gave way, as it gave them an excuse for voting against the motion.
They didn't really need all those speakers, as all the Labour and SCF ones were in favour and made much the same points, while almost all the Tories were against and ditto. Actually there were two Tory arguments: either that, while Fairtrade is good in principle, it's nothing to do with the council, or that it would be OK if the costs were nil. Even the minimal costs involved were too much for the hard-pressed council taxpayers of Enfield to be expected to bear. This may be the moment to point out (as several Labour speakers did) that later in the agenda they would be considering a move to increase councillors' allowances by 60% - at a cost to the council of £300,000!
There were two Tories who spoke in favour, and did so powerfully: Edward Smith who had chaired the Working Group, and Annette Dreblow who sat on it. She had approached the task with an open mind and been convinced. They didn't convince any of their colleagues, though. When it came to the vote we needed three Tory votes and got two - though surprisingly neither of them came from Edward Smith! He copped out to the party line and voted against despite his earlier rhetoric. Compensating for that, Henry Lamprecht, who had spoken against Fairtrade, voted for it! This may have been because he was outed by Labour as having told a constituent (in writing – he’s got a lot to learn!) that he would not only vote for Fairtrade but lobby for it! Naming and shaming sometimes works, even with Tories! Unfortunately, Lamprecht’s vote was not enough, though only because of Smith’s defection. The vote was lost 27-28, so now it’s official: Enfield council believes in Unfair trade. We had had enough and headed off for a much-needed drink without waiting to see how much these titans of the political world thought they were worth.
Comments