send the Dame your information, discretion assured.
Comments are welcome but do not necessarily reflect the view of the Dame.
Offensive/inappropriate comments will be deleted and the poster banned.

Thursday, 2 April 2015


and a reader observes.......

Close to two years have passed since Nick Paget-Brown took over the running of our council so it’s timely to look at the differences.
In the days of Merrick Cockell this appeared on the Council’s website.  
“Cllr Sir Merrick Cockell is effectively the borough’s Prime Minister, in charge of one of the most popular places to live, work and visit in the country. He is responsible for an area with a local economy which produces more revenue than many small countries. His role makes him an influential figure in London.”

One could never imagine Nick would allow such a preposterously pretentious statement to be made on his behalf and nor can one imagine that Nick would wish to stay in post for nearly fourteen years, as his predecessor did.
Corporate governance experts say the maximum time span for any chief executive or chairman is seven years-and that’s at the extremity: longer, and they say organisations tends to rot from the top.

Merrick Cockell lingered on for close to fourteen. Had he been an exceptional leader allowances might have been made; he was not.
By overstaying his welcome as he did a log jam developed with capable councillors feeling that the top job would just never become available so, in the end, they just gave up.
Even national press coverage of his vast expenses and double and triple jobbing failed to embarrass this most insensitive of leaders.

So how different is the council under the leadership of Nick Paget-Brown?
An interesting story is told of Paget-Brown.
A newly elected Lib Dem councillor was seen wandering around the council chamber looking a bit lost.
In minutes she was taken under Nick’s wing and shown the ropes. 
And his decency extends to his treatment of residents.
Nick won’t satisfy everybody but his strategy of ‘getting out and finding out’ is a first step towards restoring the democratic deficit.
He has some important changes to make in the Administration. Certain changes in the Cabinet are also overdue. Two particular names can only be considered as political ballast.
Their grasp of the job has been woefully inadequate and that incompetence overshadows the very real effort Nick Paget-Brown is making to ‘listen to residents’.

Famously, one of those councillors,Mary Weale, now in the Cabinet, was overheard to say of residents, 'we hear, but we don’t listen’. What a crass and stupid comment.

Nick Paget-Brown needs to snuff out this attitude that so symbolised the ‘ancien regime’


  1. People who hang on to power for the sake of it do enormous damage to their countries, organisations and Boroughs. Disgraced ex Leader Cllr Pooter Cockle was not quite in the class of Robert Mugabe but on a scale of 0 to 10 he was a 1 heading to zero. The sobering thought is that without the Dame and her campaign to get rid of the reptile, Cockel would now be in his 17th year as Leader of Kensington and Chelsea.

    Eventhe thought calls for stiff G&T

  2. There is still unfinished business in the Paget-Brown Cabinet. The Deputy Leader is not worthy of his position. His continued presence diminishes the respect which residents have for Cllr Paget-Brown. Time for Cllr Fielding Mellen to be put down

  3. Rock Feilding-Mellen, Elizabeth Campbell and Mary Weale should go from the Cabinet. There are others coming up who should be given a chance - Nicholls, Aouane, Rinker and Rossi spring to mind.

    1. Fly On The Wall5 April 2015 at 10:46

      What is special about Cllr Rinker? We should be told

    2. He is his own man and great on planning.

  4. It takes a long time to re float a sinking ship. All those Spanish practices, back scratching and troughing need to be stamped out.

    1. But Paget-Brown can accelerate the process by cutting the low hanging fruit. Fielding-Mellen, E Campbell and Palmer come to mind.

  5. Cllr Paget Brown must also accept that using £1 million of residents' funds to hush up RBKC's 20 year old waste management scandal: was improper. The black hole in the commercial waste account is unlawful and continues to cost residents many millions of pounds a year. Public funds are to be spent on public services; not to subsidise commercial interests.

  6. This is absolutely true and a far worse scandal than a mere £1 million a year going to Holland Park Opera. Utterly scandalous.


Comments are your responsibility. Anyone posting inappropriate comments shall have their comment removed and will be banned from posting in future. Your IP address may also be recorded and reported. Persistent abuse shall mean comments will be severely restricted in future.