The Golden Lane Estate website is run by GLE residents (GLE website comms team) and supported by the Golden Lane Residents' Association.

The forums are moderated.  Any comments which appear to be abusive or potentially libellous or which contravene the terms of service under which the site is licensed by the service provider Ning will be removed. 

Privacy Policy



1209 discussions


473 discussions


61 discussions


Site of former Richard Cloudesley School

102 discussions


16 discussions


17 discussions


31 discussions


183 discussions

Latest Activity

Nancy Honey liked GLE Website Comms Team's discussion Status of the footpaths and roads on the Estate
6 hours ago
A discussion started by Anne Corbett was featured
20 hours ago
Anne Corbett posted a discussion
22 hours ago
GLE Website Comms Team updated an event

Colpia Project Public Meeting at Golden Lane Community Centre

October 24, 2019 from 6pm to 7pm
GLE Website Comms Team posted an event

Colpia Project Public Meeting at Golden Lane Community Centre

October 24, 2019 from 6pm to 7pm
GLE Website Comms Team updated an event

Community Conversation: Our Open Spaces at Golden Lane Community Centre

October 24, 2019 from 7pm to 9:30pm
Charlotte Borger posted events
GLE Website Comms Team posted a discussion
Oct 12


Text Box

In April the Court of Common Council was presented with a petition signed by over 1,100 City residents declaring 'no confidence' in the City's standards regime.The key issue being that resident Councillors are not able to represent their constituents on matters which affect their constituents no less than themselves without obtaining ‘dispensations’ that are widely refused.

On May 24 a response from new chair of Standards Committee was published suggesting that residents were 'confused' - you can read it here.

Chairs of both Barbican Association and GLERA responded very strongly, as did Cllr Graeme Harrower - you can read their response here.

Consequently Cllr Mark Bostock submitted a request for general dispensation which was refused by the Dispensations Sub-Committee on 3 July. 

Most disappointingly for residents, Cllr Mary Durcan, herself a Barbican resident and recent appointment to the Standards Committee, also voted to refuse the request despite having signed the petition herself. Earlier in June she declared her hope 'to influence the committee to take a more permissive view that is in line with the practice of other local authorities.’ In a follow up newsletter she quotes one resident: 'I am so GLAD you are on the Standards Committee. It is quite scandalous that it has until now deemed its role to silence the representatives of as many City residents as it can.' Many residents would now welcome an explanation from Cllr Durcan as it is difficult to see her voting action as anything but a betrayal.

Cllr Harrower who attended the meeting from the public gallery has subsequently written to all Councillors again stressing the anti-resident bias of the current policy. You can read it in full here along with Cllr Bostock's dispensation request.

It should be noted that three other resident Councillors submitted a request for general dispensation and have also been refused, including GLE resident, Cllr Sue Pearson.

Cllr Bostock

“I was elected as a councillor to represent my fellow residents on matters that affect us. I now find that I am expected to seek permission continuously from this standards committee, effectively a third party, to do so. This situation is not acceptable.”

Cllr Pearson

“Yet again the City Corporation, acting through three members of its standards committee, has tried to control how resident councillors (like me) act on behalf of their constituents. This simply isn’t democracy."

Cllr Harrower

“The City Corporation must be unique among local authorities in its dismissive attitude towards its residents. This attitude is evidenced in many ways, including its “standards” regime being used to deny residents the same level of democratic representation as in other local authorities. The City Corporation is also unique in having most of its members elected by business votes - unnecessarily, because the absence of a business vote system has not prevented business from flourishing in Canary Wharf, or anywhere else in the UK or abroad. The question naturally arises as to whether a local authority that primarily serves private commercial interests (which have the means to represent themselves) at the expense of its residents (who, as anywhere, need effective representation from their councillors) should continue to have the powers of a public authority. The question isn’t new, but the answer is becoming overdue.”

'Muzzled councillors' spat leads to demands for standards reform

City Matters 29 May 2019 (published online 24 June)

City of London Corporation Chiefs seek rule change after 'gagging' row

City AM 13 Dec 2018

City councillors 'gagged' from representing residents

City Matters 29 Nov 2018

City of London Corporation caught in 'gagging' row after referring ...

City AM 27 Nov 2018

Views: 114

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of goldenlaneestate.org to add comments!

Join goldenlaneestate.org

© 2019   Created by Paul Lincoln.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service