John Biggs Am

Last week, the Government published its long-awaited report into allegations of mismanagement at Tower Hamlets Council. It is a shameful report that shows a disregard for proper, transparent, accountable decision making by the current administration. Grants were apparently sent to or increased for favoured organisations, and it looks like buildings were sold after questionable late bids, and changes to decisions, possibly at a loss to local people.

I remain busy at City Hall. There are new ideas for east London river crossings, plans for the next Crossrail line, major planning applications to dig into, budgets to manage, challenging policing matters to consider. Yet I am drawn back to comment yet again on Tower Hamlets politics. It’s not surprising – the East End is always the most raw and lively place in the UK.

I remain busy at City Hall. There are new ideas for east London river crossings, plans for the next Crossrail line, major planning applications to dig into, budgets to manage, challenging policing matters to consider. Yet I am drawn back to comment yet again on Tower Hamlets politics. It’s not surprising – the East End is always the most raw and lively place in the UK.

The East End is an amazing place. One of its most obvious secrets is that while it may have a particular image in the national mind - characterised perhaps by the television series - it is in reality constantly changing. Our area is endlessly altered by the people who come to live here. And this is particularly true because traditionally most of those who came had little, except the hunger to succeed. It may have taken a while, perhaps waiting until the next generation, but most eventually did, with the support of strong local communities. For many the journey then continued with a move to the suburbs.

In the comment section (Docklands & East London Advertiser, August 14) Archant London editor-in-chief Malcolm Starbrook argued that zero hours contracts might be a good thing. I agree that for some they might. But for many they are not.

In the comment section (Docklands & East London Advertiser, August 14) Archant London editor-in-chief Malcolm Starbrook argued that zero hours contracts might be a good thing. I agree that for some they might. But for many they are not.

There are many reasons why people switch off when the word politics is mentioned. The public perception of politicians is for some lower than it has ever been, seeing them as self-serving and appearing to do little, never responsible when things go wrong and keen to take credit for the works of others. Most politicians do not fit this description and I include those from all political parties. I frequently disagree with my rivals - that is the nature of politics - but overall I believe politicians can and do make a difference and contribute to the wider objectives of the nation and communities. The motives for going into politics vary, but most make sacrifices, both personal and financial, serving their communities.

There are many reasons why people switch off when the word politics is mentioned. The public perception of politicians is for some lower than it has ever been, seeing them as self-serving and appearing to do little, never responsible when things go wrong and keen to take credit for the works of others. Most politicians do not fit this description and I include those from all political parties. I frequently disagree with my rivals - that is the nature of politics - but overall I believe politicians can and do make a difference and contribute to the wider objectives of the nation and communities. The motives for going into politics vary, but most make sacrifices, both personal and financial, serving their communities.

Was Margaret Thatcher a good or a bad thing for east London? As you might expect, I believe many of her Government’s policies were immensely damaging locally – record job losses, growing poverty, an end to Council house building, with growing waiting lists, an underfunded health service, schools in disrepair, and a sense that many areas felt, including much of east London, that they were being abandoned. Many families have never recovered. Many individuals never did.

Was Margaret Thatcher a good or a bad thing for east London? As you might expect, I believe many of her Government’s policies were immensely damaging locally – record job losses, growing poverty, an end to Council house building, with growing waiting lists, an underfunded health service, schools in disrepair, and a sense that many areas felt, including much of east London, that they were being abandoned. Many families have never recovered. Many individuals never did.