Labour say that they are appalled that none of the candidates – Philippa Roe, Ed Argar, Jonathan Glanz and Glenys Roberts – have bothered to issue a public manifesto or subject themselves to ‘hustings’ meetings where residents can quiz them about the direction in which they want to take the Council.

Labour Councillors say that the Conservatives’ failure to let residents have a say in the election of the next Council Leader will fatally undermine the ability of the new Leader to command wide support and to take tough decisions. With an expected close fight between Philippa Roe and Ed Argar, Labour say that just 25 Conservative Councillors could decide the election of the Leader of a city of 250,000 people.

The 12 Questions for the next Leader of Westminster City Council are;

1. What are your proposals for improving adult social care so that the Council is no longer the joint worst in London?

2. How will you change the Council’s priorities so that the problems found in a recent Demos survey that Westminster Council is one of the three worst performing in the country, ranking 150 out of 152 care funding councils in England for the very bad way it is coping with the cuts, can be addressed?

3. Do you endorse The Times’ manifesto on “Cities fit for Cycling” which include a 20mph speed limit in residential areas?

4. What are your plans for reducing the 800 Westminster families in temporary accommodation (often in B & B hotels) and 1,000 families living in overcrowded accommodation, many who have children sharing a room with adults and with no place to study?

5. What are your proposals to reduce the 400 empty Council properties in Westminster waiting for renovation?

6. Will you reinstate the popular Family Quota Scheme which gave the children of Council tenants and leaseholders some priority for Council housing, and gave low-income families the opportunity to stay in their local area, live close to their family and friends and contribute to the community at a price they could afford?

7. What action do you propose to take to reverse the one-third reduction in the attendance at play-centres, which provide much needed out-of-school care and activity for both working and non-working parents, following the cut of £415,000 from the £1.7 million play budget?

8. Will you find savings from back-office expenditure in order to find the £4,100 a year required to give 50 partially sighted people free access to the RNIB Talking Book?

9. Will you reduce expenditure on the Communications and Policy Department, which costs Council Tax payers £2.8 million a year, at a time when essential frontline services continue to be cut?

10. What plans do you have to reduce Westminster Council’s reliance on the £50 million profit made from parking in order to balance the Council’s finances?

11. Do you believe that a sustainable way forward for Westminster’s finances is for residents to continue to pay a declining percentage of the Council’s expenditure?

12. Will you institute changes to the Council’s constitution so that the next Leader of the Council is a directly elected Mayor and therefore commands the support of the majority of Westminster residents?

Councillor Paul Dimoldenberg, Leader of the Labour Group, said; “Westminster Conservatives continue to treat residents with utter contempt by failing to give everyone a say in the election of a new Council Leader. Forty seven of the 48 Conservatives toed the party line on West End parking charges rather than speaking up on the side of local residents and local businesses. And now the same out-of-touch Conservatives have the gall to elect a new Leader and completely ignore local residents.”

“These 12 questions are just the first that we will be putting to candidates over the coming few weeks. If residents and local businesses have further questions they would like us to put to the candidates please let us know. Email pdimoldenberg@hotmail.co.uk with your questions.”

The party’s Chairman, Councillor Darren Cowell, said; “When the Mayor was elected he wanted an open and inclusive council and said he would be a listening Mayor, regrettably the budget process has blown that out of the water.

“The budget papers made available to opposition councillors, and in some cases even to Tory councillors, have been unclear, lacked detail and clarity and have been the worst example of a smoke and mirrors exercise.

“I am appalled that opposition councillors have had to really scratch deep in to the flesh of the budget to identify some of the true impacts on services and my fear is that the harsh reality is still yet to emerge.”

Councillor Cowell has also hit out at the standard of debate during the five hour budget meeting. He said; “There were fifteen amendments and objections on the agenda tabled by Labour, Non-coalition and the Lib Dems, not one was passed as the Tory majority voted consistently en-bloc.

“We are told there is no whip, but it is incredibly coincidental that the Tory group tended to vote as one. The one notable and creditworthy exception was Councillor James who supported us on three occasions and spoke up for the youth of Torbay.

“What was even more alarming was that it seems many of the Tory councillors had taken a vow of silence. For many of them the only time they used their voice was to say ‘against’ when voting on the amendments.

“The amendments were about serious issues and provided the only opportunity for a meaningful debate about the thinking behind the Mayor’s plans. It is very hard to have a proper debate when one side has decided not to participate.

“Supporters of the Libraries told me afterwards that they were truly shocked at the poor standard of debate and disregard they witnessed. I was horrified when I heard Councillor Tyerman shout out, ‘makes you want to go further next year’ as library supporters stormed out after the vote.

Councillor Cowell concluded, “I don’t know why I am surprised at the cavalier attitude of this Tory Mayor and Council, he has not listened to any of the feedback during the farcical consultation process, or indeed the Overview and Scrutiny Board recommendations.

“Why would anyone be surprised when a Tory council votes against measures to protect the most vulnerable in our community; our young, our old, our unemployed, our residents with learning disabilities and instead continue to write a cheque for the conference centre without them having to make any savings.”

“I’ll tell you what makes me angry – lefty crap,” he thunders in response. Like? “Well, like spending £20,000 on a dinner at the Dorchester for Sinn Fein!” – Boris Johnson, New Statesman interview with Jemima Khan.

Key points:

* This was in fact the annual St Patrick’s Day Gala dinner.

* The annual St Patrick’s Day dinner was instituted at the request of the Irish community and sponsored by the Irish Post, and a range of business sponsors particularly in the construction industry.

* It was organised on a basis of no net cost to the public purse. Each year it not only covered costs from sponsorship and ticket sales but made a donation to an Irish community charity in London and also towards the costs of the St Patrick’s Day parade and festival.

* All the main Irish political parties north and south were invited and the Irish ambassador, representatives from many Irish parties attended.

* Prominent attendees at the annual St Patrick’s Day Gala Dinner included Dermot O’Leary, Bob Geldof, Pauline McLynn (from Father Ted) and Ronnie Drew of the Dubliners.

* The sponsorship of the dinner expressed the support from Irish and Irish diaspora business for the celebration of the contribution of the Irish community to London, and was attended by representatives of all sections of the London Irish community.

* Despite it paying for itself, Boris Johnson withdrew support from the dinner when he was elected.

Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Vernon Coaker MP, said: “Irish Londoners have made a huge contribution to the peace process in Northern Ireland, and to building positive relations between the UK and Ireland. The St Patrick’s Day celebrations and all the work that Ken Livingstone did as Mayor played an important role in that. Boris Johnson’s comments are ill-judged, inaccurate and offensive.”

Paul Blomfield MP said: “In my debate in Parliament on the station bridge the Rail Minister agreed to my demand for a meeting. I’m pleased we’ve now secured a date for a roundtable meeting and that both the Transport Secretary and Rail Minister will be attending.

“Before Christmas the Rail Minister accepted the key point that there must be pedestrian access through the station. This was a significant step forward and I want Ministers to work with me, Residents Against Station Closure and the City Council to find a solution to this long-running issue that maintains open access through our station.”

Keith Hayman and Geraldine Roberts from Residents Against Station Closure said: “Over 4 years, RASC has received, widespread support from individuals, organisations, the media and all local political parties, in its campaign to keep our station bridge fully open to the public.

“We remain determined to ensure that open access is maintained, through Sheffield Station. We are pleased to have an opportunity for a face to face discussion with Ministers to resolve this long running dispute.”

Professor Ebdon was selected for the job of Director of OFFA by Business Secretary Vince Cable and Universities Minister David Willetts, from a shortlist prepared by a high-powered independent panel. But Conservative members of the Business Select Committee voted to reject his nomination at a meeting held on Monday 6 February.

Paul Blomfield MP, who is also Secretary of the All-Party Parliamentary University Group said: “Professor Ebdon was the victim of a political ambush which had more to do with coalition politics than concern with access to our universities. It is students from poorer backgrounds who will suffer from this appalling game-playing.

“Professor Ebdon has a strong leadership experience at the highest level in higher education and a great track record on improving access to university. He would be an effective champion for improving participation from under-represented groups. I hope the Business Secretary will ignore this game-playing, and confirm the appointment.”

For generations the town had depended on the coal industry to provide large scale manual labour employment and a social infrastructure. This was abruptly withdrawn leaving a vacuum that is yet to be filled.

In her speech she will highlight the fact that there are just not enough jobs in the borough. To reach the regional average, itself a low figure, would require an extra 24,000 jobs to be created.

The borough has the third lowest employment rate in Yorkshire and Humber at 67%, and requires 6,100 residents finding employment.

There are currently 6,962 which is significantly higher than the national average but more worrying is that youth unemployment is almost double the national average. These figures mean a high level of welfare dependency, with around a fifth of the working population claiming some form of out of work benefit.

In her speech she will call on the government to do more to help Barnsley and other similar towns. Specifically she will call on the government to:

1. Address the void left by the demise of Business Link arguing that a national ‘one size fits all’ does not help places like Barnsley.

2. Target UKTI inward investment to areas with less economic activity first, instead of prioritising investment in the South East.

3. Consideration should be give the reinstatement of the Grants for Business Investment scheme that allowed SMEs to make capital investments in plant and machinery, as the regional growth fund is a poor substitute and tied up in red tape.

Further, she will argue that the town needs a return of the Future Jobs Fund which was for Barnsley highly successful in getting people back into work who had not worked for some time.

Commenting Angela said; “Barnsley is a proud town. For generations it depended on coal to provide thousands of well paid manual jobs. Like many towns who depended on one industry to provide economic prosperity it was hit hard when that industry disappeared almost overnight.

“After taking many years to slowly get over the worst The recent downturn has hit the borough very hard. The town needs so much more help to recover from its industrial past.

“However, what’s on offer from this government is at best patchy and at worst destructive. I call on the government to recognise that and do much more to help towns such as Barnsley.”

1. Reverse Boris Johnson’s cuts to 1,700 police officers;

2. Reinstate sergeants to all 600 Safer Neighbourhood Teams, more of which will be beefed up to a minimum of nine officers, reversing the Tory Mayor’s cut to 300 sergeants in 2011.

According to the Metropolitan Police violent crimes such as robbery, residential burglary and rape have all risen while police has been cut. Knife crime has risen every year under Boris Johnson.

Police officer numbers peaked in 2010 at 33,260 officers. According to the Metropolitan Police there are currently just 31,657 officers in London. On Tuesday 24th January 2012 Boris Johnson admitted cutting 1,700 police officers on LBC.

Ken Livingstone said; “Boris Johnson has admitted cutting 1,700 police officers. If I am elected, I will reverse his cuts. And I will reinstate sergeants to all 600 Safer Neighbourhood Teams, more of which will be beefed up to a minimum of nine officers.

“At a time when violent crimes including robbery, knife crime and rape are all rising in London it’s time to reverse the Tory Mayor’s cuts to the police and make the streets safer.

Labour’s London Assembly transport spokesperson, Joanne McCartney AM said; “Londoners across the capital have been appalled by Boris Johnson’s police cuts. It’s essential that there is a visible policing presence on our streets.

“Boris Johnson’s decision to cut 1,700 police officers, including 300 experienced local police team sergeants shows why he is increasingly known as a Mayor who is completely out of touch.”

* Called for a scrutiny of the role of the Council and NSL in this scandal.

* Asked why Hakim Berkani was sacked for apparently refusing to operate an illegal quota system.

* Asked the Council to clarify if they knew that NSL had continued to apply a quota system, that seems to be the implication of the Berkani judgement, despite the government outlawing such a practice in 2008. The Council stated this is ‘a matter for NSL and that they [the Council] have acted lawfully’.

* Asked if the Council signed a contract with NSL requiring wardens to give out 306,000 tickets a year and 10 per warden per shift.

* Asked if the Council was aware that NSL managers discussed taking disciplinary action against wardens who issued less than 9 tickets and hour.

* Asked why the Council is denying that NSL did anything wrong when Judge Jeremy Burns ruled that Mr Berkani was dismissed by NSL due to his opposition to a “clandestine quota system”.

* Asked why the existence of a quota system has been repeatedly denied at the Council’s Public Realm Scrutiny Committee over the years when the question was asked by Opposition Labour Councillors.

Councillor Pat Mason, RBKC Labour Transport Spokesperson said; “I am absolutely furious that the Council are still supporting a parking contractor found guilty of unfairly sacking Mr Berkani for refusing to operate an illegal parking ticket system. We need to know if the Council leadership secretly sanctioned this quota system and then hid it from Councillors and residents”.

“The 2010/11 Adult Social Care Survey (ASCS) benchmarking report shows Westminster’s score (of 17.4) amongst the lowest in London. Results from the survey are aggregated together for each council and a composite score calculated. The questions covered the individual’s perceptions of their quality of life, independence, cleanliness and comfort, contact with others and extent to which the way services are delivered makes them feel positive about themselves. Data from the Research and Consultation Team suggests that opinion of the council’s services in this area have been affected by the changes in eligibility criteria which resulted in some service users receiving a smaller care package or had some elements of care withdrawn.”

Councillor Adam Hug, Labour’s Adult Social Care spokesperson said; “This latest survey is further evidence that Westminster’s cuts to vulnerable adults are too fast and too deep. Residents’ perceptions of the damaging impact that these cuts are having are real and demonstrate that the cuts are making life worse for the most vulnerable members of the community.”

Councillor Barrie Taylor, Deputy Leader of the Labour Group, said; “The cuts in those eligible to receive the Taxicard service has caused real hardship to many elderly and disabled people who now face difficulties in getting to hospital and doctors appointments. These are heartless cuts which hit those least able to cope.”

The council’s own reports warn that many of the Tories’ proposed cuts would fall disproportionately on the elderly and the vulnerable, whilst at the same time protecting the 10% council tax discount for the most well off senior citizens in the city.

Labour Group Leader Councillor Richard Williams said; “We’ve used the council’s own assessments to show where the impacts of their cuts are most serious. In many cases they affect the elderly and the vulnerable the most. In tough times like these, the better off should shoulder more of the challenges, not those with the least. That’s why we want to reallocate the £1,000,000 rich pensioners Council Tax discount to services that help many more elderly and vulnerable people.”

For example, Labour proposes to stop the Tories’ increases in the price of day care and services for disabled people. They would also use some of the saved discount to keep the city clean.

“We’ve all had enough of dirty streets with the Tories’ mismanagement of the staff dispute this year. In the year that we hope many more tourists will visit the city to see the new Sea City Museum the last thing we want is even more dirty streets.”

Labour would re-instate the £90,000 cut in support for people suffering domestic violence. Their amendment would also ensure that in a multi-cultural city like ours that the much valued Community Language Service will be re-instated.

Councillor Stephen Barnes-Andrews, Labour’s Shadow Spokesperson for Resources added; “The Tories have shown little regard for their own Equality Impact Assessments when it comes to the vulnerable. Community Safety is a key concern for all residents, especially the vulnerable.”

Labour’s proposals are also expected to save £170,000 in redundancy payments.