In this year's election campaign the most concerning issue raised was that a number of people felt they didn't hear from the Conservative Party locally. Given the In-Touch circulation and this website that is clearly very disappointing and suggests problems in getting our message out there. The best way to get our message across is with your help.
We need a viable and real alternative to the baised and self-indulgent misinformation circulated by the Lib Dems. We continue to try to get the truth across, but it isn't easy. If you want to be a part of that, please do get in touch with me either through this site or via the Elmbridge website.
Thursday, 19 May 2011
Elections 2011
The Elmbridge Borough elections provided little in the way of surprises with the Lib Dems clinging on to our village with grim determination. One could be forgiven for feeling that yellow peril was spreading when on 5th May we were flooded with yellow rosettes as a mass of over 30 Lib Dems from across the South East descended.
It is all the more creditable that in spite of this tidal wave of fence-sitting politicos, Jake Delaney was able to achieve such a close result, with only 42 votes separating him and the Lib Dem leader at Elmbridge, Barry Fairbank.
Elsewhere the Conservative vote increased and as a group at Elmbridge we won two further seats, one in Weybridge North and one in Claygate. It seems clear that this is testament to the manner in which the Conservative administration has sought to keep Council tax low, whilst maintaining services at the highest standards.
Of course one can't underestimate the national effect on local politics. If the results are to be believed it seems that the majority of residents in the Borough are broadly satisfied with the coalition, which is perhaps all the more remarkable given the cuts that have had to be made to public spending.
To those who voted for Jake can I pass on his thanks and appreciation for your support.
It is all the more creditable that in spite of this tidal wave of fence-sitting politicos, Jake Delaney was able to achieve such a close result, with only 42 votes separating him and the Lib Dem leader at Elmbridge, Barry Fairbank.
Elsewhere the Conservative vote increased and as a group at Elmbridge we won two further seats, one in Weybridge North and one in Claygate. It seems clear that this is testament to the manner in which the Conservative administration has sought to keep Council tax low, whilst maintaining services at the highest standards.
Of course one can't underestimate the national effect on local politics. If the results are to be believed it seems that the majority of residents in the Borough are broadly satisfied with the coalition, which is perhaps all the more remarkable given the cuts that have had to be made to public spending.
To those who voted for Jake can I pass on his thanks and appreciation for your support.
Tuesday, 3 May 2011
Why Vote for Jake Delaney?
Local Government has for a long time been dominated by a certain type of person. The stereotype of the retired Colonel Blimp, the worthy local do-gooder and the pedantic former civil servant, are I fear, in some cases well founded. Whilst Elmbridge does have a generally forward looking and comparatively worldly profile compared to many Councils, it still remains the predominant preserve of the rather formal austere "old guard" of Councillors, and funnily enough they are found less on the Conservative benches than elsewhere!
People with that profile can and do offer a great deal to their community and are prefectly well able to hold positions representing the locale. However, a diversity of representation is a key to any area and particularly to local government in the supposed "new age" of Localism and the Big Society.
It is time for local politics to be dominated not by the stereotypes of years gone by but by a new breed of people who understand that representing people means not being above them or set apart from them but being part of the same society and culture, sharing the same values and understanding the same motviations we all have.
Jake is a young, enterprising and energetic individual, whose drive and passion can make a real difference in Long Ditton, if given the chance.
I strongly hope that you will think long and hard about your vote on 5th May. Ultimately I hope you will vote for Jake and embrace a new style of politics in our area.
People with that profile can and do offer a great deal to their community and are prefectly well able to hold positions representing the locale. However, a diversity of representation is a key to any area and particularly to local government in the supposed "new age" of Localism and the Big Society.
It is time for local politics to be dominated not by the stereotypes of years gone by but by a new breed of people who understand that representing people means not being above them or set apart from them but being part of the same society and culture, sharing the same values and understanding the same motviations we all have.
Jake is a young, enterprising and energetic individual, whose drive and passion can make a real difference in Long Ditton, if given the chance.
I strongly hope that you will think long and hard about your vote on 5th May. Ultimately I hope you will vote for Jake and embrace a new style of politics in our area.
To AV not to AV - that appears to be the question!
On Thursday the Country will go to the polls and decide whether to operate under the AV system from now on in general elections. Many people will already have decided on their position.
Some may, unfortunately have decided not to vote on the issue, because in the words of one commentator "what's the big deal?"
The big deal is the shape and future of democracy and so I would encourage everyone to vote. For several reasons I will be voting "No" to AV. This may come as no surprise to many given it is the stated Conservative position. I hope and trust that the consistent approach displayed by all within the COnservaitve party shows the stable and sensible political philosophy so lackin in the other main parties, both locally and nationally.
So why do I say no to AV?
1. It will lead to less political stability and provide for almost certain coalition governments.
2. Manifestos and pledges made by parties will be worthless because it will all depend on their share of the overall coalition arrangements arrived at.
3. The proliferation of smaller parties will potentially lead to power being vested in the hands of a small number of unrepresentative parties.
4. Nobody wins - everybody's bland second chocie will win and nobody's first choice. It will lead to a further depersonalisation of politics in that the most succesful candidates will be the least interesting, the least colourful and the most dumbed down.
5. It is a recipe for financial and economic uncertainty and will have an effect on the UK's position as a centre for finance. Bog companies want certainty in fiscal and economic policy, and broadly speakinbg know what is coming depending upon who wins an election. Wit no outright winner who knows what is coming?
For the reasons above I suggest voting No to AV.
Some may, unfortunately have decided not to vote on the issue, because in the words of one commentator "what's the big deal?"
The big deal is the shape and future of democracy and so I would encourage everyone to vote. For several reasons I will be voting "No" to AV. This may come as no surprise to many given it is the stated Conservative position. I hope and trust that the consistent approach displayed by all within the COnservaitve party shows the stable and sensible political philosophy so lackin in the other main parties, both locally and nationally.
So why do I say no to AV?
1. It will lead to less political stability and provide for almost certain coalition governments.
2. Manifestos and pledges made by parties will be worthless because it will all depend on their share of the overall coalition arrangements arrived at.
3. The proliferation of smaller parties will potentially lead to power being vested in the hands of a small number of unrepresentative parties.
4. Nobody wins - everybody's bland second chocie will win and nobody's first choice. It will lead to a further depersonalisation of politics in that the most succesful candidates will be the least interesting, the least colourful and the most dumbed down.
5. It is a recipe for financial and economic uncertainty and will have an effect on the UK's position as a centre for finance. Bog companies want certainty in fiscal and economic policy, and broadly speakinbg know what is coming depending upon who wins an election. Wit no outright winner who knows what is coming?
For the reasons above I suggest voting No to AV.
Tuesday, 22 March 2011
Parking a Persistent Problem
Parking Across the Borough
Those who attended the Last Elmbridge Local Committee meeting could be forgiven for thinking that it was all a little too little too late. Certainly there was much discussion about the way forward in terms of parking restrictions in Elmbridge, and in particular pay and display schemes. The Committee passed a resolution proposed by County Councillor Nigel Cooper (Molesey Residents Assoc.) and seconded by me, to have a 30 minute free parking period in all bays.
Present at the meeting was County Councillor Ian Lake, the cabinet member at Surrey, responsible for highways, and therefore parking. He indicated such a swathing piece of feedback was not likely to meet with the approval of the Surrey cabinet. Indeed it has not, and the parking charges will come into force without the caveat of the 30minute free period.
Long Ditton Parking
It was against that kind of backdrop that we received the good news for Long Ditton. For a number of years we have all known of the hazards associated with the over-parking in Windmill Lane. After significant pressure brought to bear by Cllr David Archer, and myself as well as County Councillor Peter Hickman, we now have a scheme that will hopefully ensure the area of Windmill Lane is safer for pedestrians and motorists alike. The scheme will be a mixture of yellow lines and double yellow lines as well as resident's parking bays and other parking restrictions. Following consultation with residents this will include Ditton Reach, parts of Alston Close, Howard Street, and Winters Road. The scheme will not include Prospect Road, after the majority of residents rejected proposals for on-street restrictions.
Speed Bumps
There have been mentions of Speed bumps, but in line with the 2008 survey we conducted, we made sure that these were not brought in.
The Result
Of course we all know you will never please all the people all the time, and certainly I have heard from one or two people who regard the restrictions with disappointment and enmity. However, the majority view has prevailed, as indeed it should in any Democracy. When doing nothing is not an option so far as safety was concerned, I am delighted we have done something to bring the problems to the attention of Surrey CC and ensure our community is made safer.
Get In Touch
I am always interested to know more about the problems you have had regarding parking. Please contact me on tgrey@elmbridge.gov.uk if I can assist.
Those who attended the Last Elmbridge Local Committee meeting could be forgiven for thinking that it was all a little too little too late. Certainly there was much discussion about the way forward in terms of parking restrictions in Elmbridge, and in particular pay and display schemes. The Committee passed a resolution proposed by County Councillor Nigel Cooper (Molesey Residents Assoc.) and seconded by me, to have a 30 minute free parking period in all bays.
Present at the meeting was County Councillor Ian Lake, the cabinet member at Surrey, responsible for highways, and therefore parking. He indicated such a swathing piece of feedback was not likely to meet with the approval of the Surrey cabinet. Indeed it has not, and the parking charges will come into force without the caveat of the 30minute free period.
Long Ditton Parking
It was against that kind of backdrop that we received the good news for Long Ditton. For a number of years we have all known of the hazards associated with the over-parking in Windmill Lane. After significant pressure brought to bear by Cllr David Archer, and myself as well as County Councillor Peter Hickman, we now have a scheme that will hopefully ensure the area of Windmill Lane is safer for pedestrians and motorists alike. The scheme will be a mixture of yellow lines and double yellow lines as well as resident's parking bays and other parking restrictions. Following consultation with residents this will include Ditton Reach, parts of Alston Close, Howard Street, and Winters Road. The scheme will not include Prospect Road, after the majority of residents rejected proposals for on-street restrictions.
Speed Bumps
There have been mentions of Speed bumps, but in line with the 2008 survey we conducted, we made sure that these were not brought in.
The Result
Of course we all know you will never please all the people all the time, and certainly I have heard from one or two people who regard the restrictions with disappointment and enmity. However, the majority view has prevailed, as indeed it should in any Democracy. When doing nothing is not an option so far as safety was concerned, I am delighted we have done something to bring the problems to the attention of Surrey CC and ensure our community is made safer.
Get In Touch
I am always interested to know more about the problems you have had regarding parking. Please contact me on tgrey@elmbridge.gov.uk if I can assist.
The Good, The Bad and the Let's Wait and See
It's been almost a year since the coalition came to power. The furious negotiations between the Liberal Democrats and the Conservative leadership seems a long way off now.
Never Forget The Debt
I'm pleased to say that some things have not been forgotten. Primarily we have not forgotten the mess Gordon Brown left us in. Things are tougher now than they were 3 years ago, and doubtless people will start blaming the "bad old Tories" at some point. However, for the time being sense is still prevailing as the Country remembers the difficult but honest appraisal the Conservative Party, and in particular David Cameron gave, of the future, this time last year.
Tax, Lies and Tuition Fees
The three main parties all made various pledges and promises. When elected as the new Labour leader Ed Miliband made promises and pledges. In the case of both Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband those pledges have already been shown to be worth less than the paper they were written on.
Nick Clegg's volte face on tuition fees has been astounding, and is only the most notable of a litany of pledges he made before the elcetion. One can forgive him for compromising for the sake of stable government, but there is a difference between compromising and offering a free vote on the one hand, and wholeheartedly rejecting your own promises. The latter can best be described as disingenuous, but at worst as a lie.
Ed Miliband on the other hand wasted little time after Alan Johnsons' departure as Shadow Chancellor in appointing Ed Balls. Dare we ask is Mr Balls a stalwart supporter of Mr Miliband's economic vision for the Country? Er not exactly, given less than 9 months earlier he had stood in a leadership campaign against Mr Miliband, the chief reason being his fundamental disagreement with Ed's economic approach!
So who didn't lie or at the very least bend the truth? The Conservative leadership have made their position clear from the off. Things needed to be cut back spending was out of control and things were going to be extremely tough, but it was the only way out of the abyss into which Blair and Brown had pushed us. Dare we forget the note found in the Treasurey written by the outgoing senior civil servant in that department in May 2010 - "There's no money left"!
The Recession in Elmbridge
Well there wasn't. But things are getting better very slowly. The pinch is being felt and those around our Borough are no exception. Whilst we remain well below the national jobless average in Elmbridge, we are still seeing increases in numbers out of work. That is bad news and means more people having to rely on Local Authorities to survive.
Balancing the Books at Elmbridge
Happily Elmbridge is in as good a position as any authority to weather the storm. That is in no small part thanks to the frugal and prudent management of the Borough's finances by the Conservative administrations over the last 5 years.
Before that we had a Residents Association led Council. Ideal for petty bickering but not so good if you want to keep Council Tax low and frontline services financially viable.
The Residents Associations persist in the view that it will all be all right even if there isn't any money. It won't. Around the Country we are seeing Councils reaping the consequences of failing to make savings and prudent financial management decision during the good times, preferring the spend, spend, spend culture promulgated by New Labour.
A stark figure that lays this bare is that in their last 5 years in control of Elmbridge Borough Council the Residents Associations raised Council tax by a staggering 40%. In the last 5 years the Conservative administration has raised Council tax by only 4.9%!
Never Forget The Debt
I'm pleased to say that some things have not been forgotten. Primarily we have not forgotten the mess Gordon Brown left us in. Things are tougher now than they were 3 years ago, and doubtless people will start blaming the "bad old Tories" at some point. However, for the time being sense is still prevailing as the Country remembers the difficult but honest appraisal the Conservative Party, and in particular David Cameron gave, of the future, this time last year.
Tax, Lies and Tuition Fees
The three main parties all made various pledges and promises. When elected as the new Labour leader Ed Miliband made promises and pledges. In the case of both Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband those pledges have already been shown to be worth less than the paper they were written on.
Nick Clegg's volte face on tuition fees has been astounding, and is only the most notable of a litany of pledges he made before the elcetion. One can forgive him for compromising for the sake of stable government, but there is a difference between compromising and offering a free vote on the one hand, and wholeheartedly rejecting your own promises. The latter can best be described as disingenuous, but at worst as a lie.
Ed Miliband on the other hand wasted little time after Alan Johnsons' departure as Shadow Chancellor in appointing Ed Balls. Dare we ask is Mr Balls a stalwart supporter of Mr Miliband's economic vision for the Country? Er not exactly, given less than 9 months earlier he had stood in a leadership campaign against Mr Miliband, the chief reason being his fundamental disagreement with Ed's economic approach!
So who didn't lie or at the very least bend the truth? The Conservative leadership have made their position clear from the off. Things needed to be cut back spending was out of control and things were going to be extremely tough, but it was the only way out of the abyss into which Blair and Brown had pushed us. Dare we forget the note found in the Treasurey written by the outgoing senior civil servant in that department in May 2010 - "There's no money left"!
The Recession in Elmbridge
Well there wasn't. But things are getting better very slowly. The pinch is being felt and those around our Borough are no exception. Whilst we remain well below the national jobless average in Elmbridge, we are still seeing increases in numbers out of work. That is bad news and means more people having to rely on Local Authorities to survive.
Balancing the Books at Elmbridge
Happily Elmbridge is in as good a position as any authority to weather the storm. That is in no small part thanks to the frugal and prudent management of the Borough's finances by the Conservative administrations over the last 5 years.
Before that we had a Residents Association led Council. Ideal for petty bickering but not so good if you want to keep Council Tax low and frontline services financially viable.
The Residents Associations persist in the view that it will all be all right even if there isn't any money. It won't. Around the Country we are seeing Councils reaping the consequences of failing to make savings and prudent financial management decision during the good times, preferring the spend, spend, spend culture promulgated by New Labour.
A stark figure that lays this bare is that in their last 5 years in control of Elmbridge Borough Council the Residents Associations raised Council tax by a staggering 40%. In the last 5 years the Conservative administration has raised Council tax by only 4.9%!
Monday, 5 July 2010
The Dust is Settling
It is now just over a month since the new coalition government took charge. Whilst the initial flurry of novelty is beginning to calm down, the picture for local communities remains a little unclear. True to the manifesto we are seeing the first signs of "empowering local communities" in the decision making, but at the moment the ideology and macro-policy has yet to be translated into hard and fast rules.
The good news is that in planning, government policy appears to be to hand control back to the "grass roots" and to ensure a bottom up system rather than the imposition of targets on Local Planning Authorities. This will hopefully mean the end of the ridiculous South East Plan that required the Councils in the South East to ensure certain housing targets were hit. To suggest the plan is artificial is something of an under-statement. However, there is a real danger that with the changes we will see the rate and nature of the affordable and social housing available in our Borough hit and we will forever be offering significanlty lower amounts than we would like. Perhaps we just have to accept that Elmbridge is an expensive place to live and that we are not going to be able to cater to all. I hope that is not the situation we find ourselves in, because there are so many young and vulnerable families, single and hard-working individuals, and older people who need our help in the form of "assisted housing," to give it a deliberately broad title.
In other ways too the new Government have sought to give control back. The plans for redesignating gardens is unlikely to have a dramatic effect in the short-term, but will at least signal a change of approach to the mass of developers eyeing up back gardens for a fast buck.
Additionally the increased emphasis on infrastructure to match housing demand is to be welcomed. At the moment though, we find ourselves in uncertain times. How will these changes be given effect? When will they occur? What is the reality behind how they will affect the South East? and what real power will we see in the hands of residents?
In taxation and public sector pensions we can only welcome the moves from Central Government towards an emphasis on greater curbs in public spending and review of public sector pensions. To suggest as Labour do, that final salary pensions in the public sector can be retained is to deny the financial reality. We cannot afford either locally of nationally to pump sufficient money into the pension funds of Elmbridge, Surrey or Westminster to make them viable for final salary pensions. What we can do is look at what is realistic and deliver it. What we can also do is embrace the "council tax holiday" offered by Central Government. It was no gimmick that David Cameron promised councils returning a 0 increase that there would be central government funding in the first two years to bring in an equivalent sum to a gross 2.5% increase. This is great news for all tiers of Local Government and most importantly for taxpayers.
Of course, it's not all good news, and the current financial situation has major ramifications for a great many in our community. Pensions are still not yielding sufficient returns for many retirees to live on, unemployment is still on a gradual increase, and people still need the provision offered by Local and Central
Government.
Now is the time to look at how we deliver the best to our community, and I welcome any ideas you may have for doing so. Please do get in touch either through this site or tgrey@elmbridge.gov.uk and we can arrange a time to discuss your ideas.
The good news is that in planning, government policy appears to be to hand control back to the "grass roots" and to ensure a bottom up system rather than the imposition of targets on Local Planning Authorities. This will hopefully mean the end of the ridiculous South East Plan that required the Councils in the South East to ensure certain housing targets were hit. To suggest the plan is artificial is something of an under-statement. However, there is a real danger that with the changes we will see the rate and nature of the affordable and social housing available in our Borough hit and we will forever be offering significanlty lower amounts than we would like. Perhaps we just have to accept that Elmbridge is an expensive place to live and that we are not going to be able to cater to all. I hope that is not the situation we find ourselves in, because there are so many young and vulnerable families, single and hard-working individuals, and older people who need our help in the form of "assisted housing," to give it a deliberately broad title.
In other ways too the new Government have sought to give control back. The plans for redesignating gardens is unlikely to have a dramatic effect in the short-term, but will at least signal a change of approach to the mass of developers eyeing up back gardens for a fast buck.
Additionally the increased emphasis on infrastructure to match housing demand is to be welcomed. At the moment though, we find ourselves in uncertain times. How will these changes be given effect? When will they occur? What is the reality behind how they will affect the South East? and what real power will we see in the hands of residents?
In taxation and public sector pensions we can only welcome the moves from Central Government towards an emphasis on greater curbs in public spending and review of public sector pensions. To suggest as Labour do, that final salary pensions in the public sector can be retained is to deny the financial reality. We cannot afford either locally of nationally to pump sufficient money into the pension funds of Elmbridge, Surrey or Westminster to make them viable for final salary pensions. What we can do is look at what is realistic and deliver it. What we can also do is embrace the "council tax holiday" offered by Central Government. It was no gimmick that David Cameron promised councils returning a 0 increase that there would be central government funding in the first two years to bring in an equivalent sum to a gross 2.5% increase. This is great news for all tiers of Local Government and most importantly for taxpayers.
Of course, it's not all good news, and the current financial situation has major ramifications for a great many in our community. Pensions are still not yielding sufficient returns for many retirees to live on, unemployment is still on a gradual increase, and people still need the provision offered by Local and Central
Government.
Now is the time to look at how we deliver the best to our community, and I welcome any ideas you may have for doing so. Please do get in touch either through this site or tgrey@elmbridge.gov.uk and we can arrange a time to discuss your ideas.
Tuesday, 11 May 2010
The Election
Many of you will still be taking in the National result, which has been something of an interesting, not to say unsettling one for the Country.
However, it is some reassurance to know that locally at any rate the stability of a Conservative administration remains. Thanks to those of you who voted for Jane in the election. In Long Ditton the result was disappointing with Jane finding herself in second place by some margin. It would have been a great thing for our community to have someone of Jane's energy and local knowledge in a position to help us achieve the very best.
However, I will of course continue to give the very best service to Long Ditton and Elmbridge, and will make sure my Conservative colleagues do the same. I will continue to strive to keep services as good as ever whilst maintaining council tax at the lowest possible level.
I am grateful to all those who helped the campaign and did so honestly and properly. My previous plea for a sensible and positive campaign from all parties was I fear too much to hope for. The continued promulgation of half-truths and outright lies by some, has become endemic and does no one any favours at all.
Reading some of the statements made I am at a loss as to how to respond to complete and unmitigated falsehood. It seems some would rather play silly games than get on with the sensible job of helping the community we serve, whether it is the local community in Elmbridge or the whole Country.
It is indicative of the transparency and fairness that prevails in the Conservative party that we continue both locally and nationally to get our message across. Whether popular or otherwise that message is clear and absolute.
Whether other parties choose to descend into lies and scurrilous game-playing at a time when faith in politics is at an all time low, must remain a matter for the conscience of the individuals involved. In many cases that is a perilous position to find ourselves in as it appears some have very little by way of moral integrity.
I make a plea once again to all in government, whether local or national:
You've had your fun at the expense of the truth, now at least knuckle down and get on with the job you purport to want, so that next time the glorification of your own achievements might actually be true rather than some hackneyed attempt to disguise the inconsequential efforts you have previously made.
However, it is some reassurance to know that locally at any rate the stability of a Conservative administration remains. Thanks to those of you who voted for Jane in the election. In Long Ditton the result was disappointing with Jane finding herself in second place by some margin. It would have been a great thing for our community to have someone of Jane's energy and local knowledge in a position to help us achieve the very best.
However, I will of course continue to give the very best service to Long Ditton and Elmbridge, and will make sure my Conservative colleagues do the same. I will continue to strive to keep services as good as ever whilst maintaining council tax at the lowest possible level.
I am grateful to all those who helped the campaign and did so honestly and properly. My previous plea for a sensible and positive campaign from all parties was I fear too much to hope for. The continued promulgation of half-truths and outright lies by some, has become endemic and does no one any favours at all.
Reading some of the statements made I am at a loss as to how to respond to complete and unmitigated falsehood. It seems some would rather play silly games than get on with the sensible job of helping the community we serve, whether it is the local community in Elmbridge or the whole Country.
It is indicative of the transparency and fairness that prevails in the Conservative party that we continue both locally and nationally to get our message across. Whether popular or otherwise that message is clear and absolute.
Whether other parties choose to descend into lies and scurrilous game-playing at a time when faith in politics is at an all time low, must remain a matter for the conscience of the individuals involved. In many cases that is a perilous position to find ourselves in as it appears some have very little by way of moral integrity.
I make a plea once again to all in government, whether local or national:
You've had your fun at the expense of the truth, now at least knuckle down and get on with the job you purport to want, so that next time the glorification of your own achievements might actually be true rather than some hackneyed attempt to disguise the inconsequential efforts you have previously made.
Thursday, 8 April 2010
The New Ember Centre Opens on 12th April 2010
As readers of this blog will know the Ember Centre's new home has been under refurbishment for the last few months with a planned opening date of the 12th April 2010.
It is gratifying to be able to report that the Centre will be delivered on time and on budget, and is due to open its doors on Monday the 12th April. Getting the centre ready on time has been a real achievement and I congratulate all those whose hard work has culminated in the delivery of the project on time. Since February the following things have been undertaken:
Ongoing stakeholder consultation has taken place on a weekly basis at the Dittons Library in Mercer Close.
A meeting with Surrey Police has taken place to develop future partnership projects.
All orders of furniture and fittings are confirmed for delivery by close of business on 9th April 2010.
Work will continue throughout the weekend of the 10th and 11th April in order to get things completed and fully operational by Monday morning.
I am sure that the new facility will be a marvellous addition to our community and will see the already thriving Ember Centre go from strength to strength in its new home.
It is gratifying to be able to report that the Centre will be delivered on time and on budget, and is due to open its doors on Monday the 12th April. Getting the centre ready on time has been a real achievement and I congratulate all those whose hard work has culminated in the delivery of the project on time. Since February the following things have been undertaken:
Ongoing stakeholder consultation has taken place on a weekly basis at the Dittons Library in Mercer Close.
A meeting with Surrey Police has taken place to develop future partnership projects.
All orders of furniture and fittings are confirmed for delivery by close of business on 9th April 2010.
Work will continue throughout the weekend of the 10th and 11th April in order to get things completed and fully operational by Monday morning.
I am sure that the new facility will be a marvellous addition to our community and will see the already thriving Ember Centre go from strength to strength in its new home.
Monday, 15 March 2010
A Plea to The Residents Associations
I am sure all those voting in the election on 6th May will use their own judgment and wisdom to select the party they feel can represent them best. In so far as the election literature emanating from the Residents Associations helps to clarify their position, I welcome it. However the negative and disingenuous campaigning of their recent leaflet is no help to democracy, nor is it any help to individuals debating who best to vote for.
What is a Political Party?
The latest salvo of their politicised literature dropped through many letter boxes this weekend. Amongst the claims their leaflet makes is that, and I paraphrase: 'If you are weary of party politics and mistrust politicians...then vote for us.' This is a bold claim from a group that has politicised local elections consistently to a level unprecedented in the rest of Surrey. The constant running down of anything emanating from a Conservative, the refusal to acknowledge anyone else's ideas, even if they are clearly good ones, does tend to reek of a political agenda. The greatest problem in the bold claim comes when one analyses the nature of those Residents Associations who make this claim.
They are registered political parties.
They run election campaigns.
They stand for public office in elections.
They are funded by membership contributions.
They take a political stance on issues.
Suggesting therefore that they are not politicised groups is disingenuous in the extreme. The very suggestion is spin aimed at courting the votes of those who believe the magazine that comes through the door is not a politically driven pamphlet. It is doubtless a clever strategy, particularly at a time when MPs have catastrophically let down not only the entire Country but also all national political parties.
Career Politicians
However to imply as they seek to do in their literature, that the local Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Labour members are career politicians is simply piffle and nonsense. We are local people who care about where we live.
Council Tax
In the pamphlet the Residents Associations go on to make the following statement: "The current rulers of the Council 'promised' to keep increases [in Council tax] to zero, but put it up by more than twice the rate of inflation last year when there were no Borough elections..."
At risk of reminding those Councillors in the Residents group what it is Local Government is about, it is not about "ruling." It is, unlike the perception of some in opposition, about representing the community we were elceted to serve. No Councillor "rules" anything. Every Councillor, MP, or otherwise elected representative is a servant of the community who elected them. They were elected to give effect to the policies of the party they represent for the good of that community. The God complex demonstrated by this comment is unsalutary, dangerous, undemocratic and out of touch.
What the Residents' leaflet keeps very quiet about is that in the last 4 years under a Conservative administration Council tax has gone up a sum total of 4.9%, with the Leader of the Council, Cllr Roy Taylor, recently announcing another nil increase for the forthcoming financial year. In the 4 years before that under the Residents administration it went up 60%!
Thanks to prudent management in the last 4 years we do have some ring-fenced sums that will hopefully see us through what will be even more difficult years in 2011 and 2012, but that is by no means certain. If the Residents Associations had their way that would already have been depleted to a level making it inconsequential to the probable levels of income necessary to cover the public sector pensions pay review, to cover the falling interest rates on local Council investments, and to cover the extensive shortfall caused by derisory grants from Central Government to Surrey Councils.
Councillors Allowances
In addition to all of this, the leaflet has the gall to attack the Conservative group on the issue of Councillors allowances. This year there was no rise. Last year the vast majority of Councillors, including all but a handful of the Conservative group voted against any rise, and so there was no rise.
As a result Councillors at Elmbridge receive one of the lowest allowances in the Country. That is not an issue for the vast majority of us, as we are here not for the money, but for the privilege of helping our community. However, we have to have an eye on ensuring the allowance doesn't fall too far behind where independent auditors tell us it should be, because it would mean that potential new Councillors would not be able to afford to do the job.
In spite of this the Residents Associations appear not to have taken the slightest notice of the democratic case for a sensible level of allowance, and are instead calling for the reduction of the allowance. It appears they are only prepared to take such a bold stance in their literature. No such stance was taken by them when the matter was discussed in Council this year or last year.
A Plea
I would plead with all parties to be straight forward and completely honest with those we are here to serve. The only reason for negative campaigning is if you have no substance to your own policies or promises. So please a little more time spent on how to achieve what you set out to do and a little less on castigating other parties that are doing their best too.
What is a Political Party?
The latest salvo of their politicised literature dropped through many letter boxes this weekend. Amongst the claims their leaflet makes is that, and I paraphrase: 'If you are weary of party politics and mistrust politicians...then vote for us.' This is a bold claim from a group that has politicised local elections consistently to a level unprecedented in the rest of Surrey. The constant running down of anything emanating from a Conservative, the refusal to acknowledge anyone else's ideas, even if they are clearly good ones, does tend to reek of a political agenda. The greatest problem in the bold claim comes when one analyses the nature of those Residents Associations who make this claim.
They are registered political parties.
They run election campaigns.
They stand for public office in elections.
They are funded by membership contributions.
They take a political stance on issues.
Suggesting therefore that they are not politicised groups is disingenuous in the extreme. The very suggestion is spin aimed at courting the votes of those who believe the magazine that comes through the door is not a politically driven pamphlet. It is doubtless a clever strategy, particularly at a time when MPs have catastrophically let down not only the entire Country but also all national political parties.
Career Politicians
However to imply as they seek to do in their literature, that the local Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Labour members are career politicians is simply piffle and nonsense. We are local people who care about where we live.
Council Tax
In the pamphlet the Residents Associations go on to make the following statement: "The current rulers of the Council 'promised' to keep increases [in Council tax] to zero, but put it up by more than twice the rate of inflation last year when there were no Borough elections..."
At risk of reminding those Councillors in the Residents group what it is Local Government is about, it is not about "ruling." It is, unlike the perception of some in opposition, about representing the community we were elceted to serve. No Councillor "rules" anything. Every Councillor, MP, or otherwise elected representative is a servant of the community who elected them. They were elected to give effect to the policies of the party they represent for the good of that community. The God complex demonstrated by this comment is unsalutary, dangerous, undemocratic and out of touch.
What the Residents' leaflet keeps very quiet about is that in the last 4 years under a Conservative administration Council tax has gone up a sum total of 4.9%, with the Leader of the Council, Cllr Roy Taylor, recently announcing another nil increase for the forthcoming financial year. In the 4 years before that under the Residents administration it went up 60%!
Thanks to prudent management in the last 4 years we do have some ring-fenced sums that will hopefully see us through what will be even more difficult years in 2011 and 2012, but that is by no means certain. If the Residents Associations had their way that would already have been depleted to a level making it inconsequential to the probable levels of income necessary to cover the public sector pensions pay review, to cover the falling interest rates on local Council investments, and to cover the extensive shortfall caused by derisory grants from Central Government to Surrey Councils.
Councillors Allowances
In addition to all of this, the leaflet has the gall to attack the Conservative group on the issue of Councillors allowances. This year there was no rise. Last year the vast majority of Councillors, including all but a handful of the Conservative group voted against any rise, and so there was no rise.
As a result Councillors at Elmbridge receive one of the lowest allowances in the Country. That is not an issue for the vast majority of us, as we are here not for the money, but for the privilege of helping our community. However, we have to have an eye on ensuring the allowance doesn't fall too far behind where independent auditors tell us it should be, because it would mean that potential new Councillors would not be able to afford to do the job.
In spite of this the Residents Associations appear not to have taken the slightest notice of the democratic case for a sensible level of allowance, and are instead calling for the reduction of the allowance. It appears they are only prepared to take such a bold stance in their literature. No such stance was taken by them when the matter was discussed in Council this year or last year.
A Plea
I would plead with all parties to be straight forward and completely honest with those we are here to serve. The only reason for negative campaigning is if you have no substance to your own policies or promises. So please a little more time spent on how to achieve what you set out to do and a little less on castigating other parties that are doing their best too.
Thursday, 11 March 2010
MANNY'S WINS SMALL SHOP OF THE YEAR!
At a time of increased economic concern and closure of small businesses left right and centre, it is inspirational to see a shop not just bucking the trend but giving so much more to a community than Tesco Metro or Sainsbury's Local.
I was privileged to attend the inaugural award ceremony at the House of Commons yesterday, for the small shop of the year awards. The awards were born out of a Parliamentary cross-party group chaired by David Aymes MP. Held in conjunction with the National Federation of Retail Newsagents (NFRN) the awards sought to recognise not only great local shops, but those shops that go the extra mile to play a real part in the local community they serve. Amidst the excitement there was a salutary reminder that we either "use it or lose it." If we fail to patronise our local shops they just won't survive.
Hundreds of shops were nominated from all over the Country. Of those the top ten were invited to attend the ceremony yesterday (10th March). Without question all those in attendance had some extremely strong credentials.
However, in true Oscar style the announcements were made and top of the poll was our very own Manny's!
I am sure I speak for us all in Long Ditton when I say we are extremely proud of Manny and all he has achieved. Manny is a credit not only to Long Ditton but to all he serves on a daily basis. I was also privileged to spend an afternoon with Manny's wife, mother-in-law and three daughters, all of whom are rightly very proud of their Dad! Photos of the day to follow!
I was privileged to attend the inaugural award ceremony at the House of Commons yesterday, for the small shop of the year awards. The awards were born out of a Parliamentary cross-party group chaired by David Aymes MP. Held in conjunction with the National Federation of Retail Newsagents (NFRN) the awards sought to recognise not only great local shops, but those shops that go the extra mile to play a real part in the local community they serve. Amidst the excitement there was a salutary reminder that we either "use it or lose it." If we fail to patronise our local shops they just won't survive.
Hundreds of shops were nominated from all over the Country. Of those the top ten were invited to attend the ceremony yesterday (10th March). Without question all those in attendance had some extremely strong credentials.
However, in true Oscar style the announcements were made and top of the poll was our very own Manny's!
I am sure I speak for us all in Long Ditton when I say we are extremely proud of Manny and all he has achieved. Manny is a credit not only to Long Ditton but to all he serves on a daily basis. I was also privileged to spend an afternoon with Manny's wife, mother-in-law and three daughters, all of whom are rightly very proud of their Dad! Photos of the day to follow!
Monday, 8 February 2010
The Human Rights Act: Repeal or Replace?
As a practitioner of Criminal Law both before during and after the introduction of the Human Rights Act I find the current debate over it's future somewhat confusing.
When it came into force it had two significant effects. Firstly it saved the UK government a significant amount of money in the long term. The UK as initially a non signatory to the convention but later a signatory without adoption into UK law, nevertheless recognised the convention in a kind of hybrid way. The result was the British courts were the most appealed in Europe. Judges were bound not to give human rights compliant judgments in certain cases, and no lawful remedy was available to the domestic appellate courts. Judges were doing things they knew full well would be overturned but with no way of complying. The sheer volume of cases (in one year the UK was appealed 38 times to the full court. Italy was next with 9)! Many were minor but fundamental breaches of art. 6 or art. 8.
The second effect was to launch the careers of some legal practitioners who climbed on a fairly easy bandwagon, wrote a bluffers guide to the European Convention and thereby got themselves noticed. Notable amongst authors on the subject is the current DPP.
Whilst I agree with the view that ultimately if we are entering the fray of codification we need to avail ourselves of a similar codified level of protection, I do not agree that the Human Rights Act should be repealed. To do so is a pointless hollow act having little real substance and simply a method of appeasing Euro sceptics who are confused by the division of European bodies. Lest we forget the European Court of Human Rights has no legal or constitutional connection to the EU save in the most dissolute of ways.
I have heard from some quarters the suggestion that it is Europe making the UK more litigous. I am bound to say I find this both faintly amusing and also faintly troubling. It is amusing because it fails completely to address the fact that as with so much of our modern culture it comes directly from the most litigious nation on earth - the USA. It has nothing to do with Europe and everything to do with Ally McBeal, Boston Law, and our own homegrown Judge John Deed, as well as the trip and slip ambulance chasers in advertisements for personal injury representation.
This may seem a frivolous suggestion but bear in mind that Law is at base a human industry. It is driven by people. People are not driven by s.3(2)(a) of the Nonsense Act 2000. they are driven by the society in which they live to believe they have an entitlement to things.
It is the great "entitlement" fallacy that has damaged this Country beyond recognition. It is this fallacy that comes direct from Blair and the leftist agenda. To blame Europe for providing the tools is like blaming Nobel for creating TNT. It is "New Labour" who have created the beast not Europe, nor for that matter the USA.
That is why I find it troubling that we should blame Europe. It isn't Europe it's us as a nation who elected a man as intellectually and ethically moribund as Tony Blair and then allowed him to strip this Country of the unwritten decency that has informed our culture, society and constitution since Magna Carta. Don't let them off the hook. It's Labour who have done this, not Europe nor for that matter the USA.
Both may have shown us the path but it is New Labour who have run, skipped and jumped along it. Its time for a real change and for some honesty.
When it came into force it had two significant effects. Firstly it saved the UK government a significant amount of money in the long term. The UK as initially a non signatory to the convention but later a signatory without adoption into UK law, nevertheless recognised the convention in a kind of hybrid way. The result was the British courts were the most appealed in Europe. Judges were bound not to give human rights compliant judgments in certain cases, and no lawful remedy was available to the domestic appellate courts. Judges were doing things they knew full well would be overturned but with no way of complying. The sheer volume of cases (in one year the UK was appealed 38 times to the full court. Italy was next with 9)! Many were minor but fundamental breaches of art. 6 or art. 8.
The second effect was to launch the careers of some legal practitioners who climbed on a fairly easy bandwagon, wrote a bluffers guide to the European Convention and thereby got themselves noticed. Notable amongst authors on the subject is the current DPP.
Whilst I agree with the view that ultimately if we are entering the fray of codification we need to avail ourselves of a similar codified level of protection, I do not agree that the Human Rights Act should be repealed. To do so is a pointless hollow act having little real substance and simply a method of appeasing Euro sceptics who are confused by the division of European bodies. Lest we forget the European Court of Human Rights has no legal or constitutional connection to the EU save in the most dissolute of ways.
I have heard from some quarters the suggestion that it is Europe making the UK more litigous. I am bound to say I find this both faintly amusing and also faintly troubling. It is amusing because it fails completely to address the fact that as with so much of our modern culture it comes directly from the most litigious nation on earth - the USA. It has nothing to do with Europe and everything to do with Ally McBeal, Boston Law, and our own homegrown Judge John Deed, as well as the trip and slip ambulance chasers in advertisements for personal injury representation.
This may seem a frivolous suggestion but bear in mind that Law is at base a human industry. It is driven by people. People are not driven by s.3(2)(a) of the Nonsense Act 2000. they are driven by the society in which they live to believe they have an entitlement to things.
It is the great "entitlement" fallacy that has damaged this Country beyond recognition. It is this fallacy that comes direct from Blair and the leftist agenda. To blame Europe for providing the tools is like blaming Nobel for creating TNT. It is "New Labour" who have created the beast not Europe, nor for that matter the USA.
That is why I find it troubling that we should blame Europe. It isn't Europe it's us as a nation who elected a man as intellectually and ethically moribund as Tony Blair and then allowed him to strip this Country of the unwritten decency that has informed our culture, society and constitution since Magna Carta. Don't let them off the hook. It's Labour who have done this, not Europe nor for that matter the USA.
Both may have shown us the path but it is New Labour who have run, skipped and jumped along it. Its time for a real change and for some honesty.
Man-Made Global Warming: The Spin, the E-mails and the Truth
I don't pretend to know how great or small the man made threat is to our environment. Such an admission seems to be almost unthinkable to many politically correct devotees of the current vogue for everything "green."
However, anyone who does presume to know ought to closely question why. There are perhaps 100 people alive today who have sufficient expertise to interpret the science behind the issue. As a result of political grand-standing there has been a kind of unseemly horse-trading going on with these 100 or so individuals. The global warming deniers claim to have more experts in their corner, whilst the environmental lobby say the contrary.
The reality is the scientific community is not as polarised as many politicians and the media would have us believe. None can give a clear unambiguous answer to the question posed by modern political manouvering, namely to what extent is man causing the effects we are currently seeing on our environment, whether its the polar ice-caps or change in average temperature in South East England? The simple reason is that whilst science may search for absolutes, in terms of this specific area of climatology, no such thing currently exists.
It is time to de-politicise the whole issue and get back to what politics should be about...making lives better. Let's leave the science to the scientists.
That said, there is no point pursuing anything other than an eco-friendly policy in Local Government. To do otherwise would be financially disastrous as a result of government penalties imposed on excessive landfill use, lack of recycling initiatives and a whole raft of other climate targets. So love it or loathe it the green agenda makes sense financially even if one disagrees with it on an environmental level.
However, anyone who does presume to know ought to closely question why. There are perhaps 100 people alive today who have sufficient expertise to interpret the science behind the issue. As a result of political grand-standing there has been a kind of unseemly horse-trading going on with these 100 or so individuals. The global warming deniers claim to have more experts in their corner, whilst the environmental lobby say the contrary.
The reality is the scientific community is not as polarised as many politicians and the media would have us believe. None can give a clear unambiguous answer to the question posed by modern political manouvering, namely to what extent is man causing the effects we are currently seeing on our environment, whether its the polar ice-caps or change in average temperature in South East England? The simple reason is that whilst science may search for absolutes, in terms of this specific area of climatology, no such thing currently exists.
It is time to de-politicise the whole issue and get back to what politics should be about...making lives better. Let's leave the science to the scientists.
That said, there is no point pursuing anything other than an eco-friendly policy in Local Government. To do otherwise would be financially disastrous as a result of government penalties imposed on excessive landfill use, lack of recycling initiatives and a whole raft of other climate targets. So love it or loathe it the green agenda makes sense financially even if one disagrees with it on an environmental level.
The Ember Centre - A Response
I am grateful to those who have recently commented on the Ember Centre post on this blog. I am bound to say that I think suggesting I am losing my mind is unfortunate and doesn't do anything to further their legitimate if ill-founded concerns.
I would ask those who doubt my stance and that of the current administration to look back at the Esher News and Mail archives on the subject, at the minutes of the Full Council meetings at EBC, at the meetings of the various Overview and Scrutiny committees dealing with this topic last year, and I would invite them to reconsider their assertion that there was a move to close the Ember Centre.
I have never and would never put my name to such a proposal as I have made perfectly clear on three previous occasions, both in the press, in a Council meeting and in this blog.
I am not about to comment on the proximity between the Residents Association and the Vera Fletcher Hall, that has been a matter for the Standards Board previously and it is right to say that after investigation no breach was found to exist. That is and should be, the only stated position.
In answer to the question will I post details? Yes I will post details as and when I get them. As I have previously stated things are in the early stages, however I have received, along with other local Councillors an updated position and I am only too happy to share that.
I would ask those who doubt my stance and that of the current administration to look back at the Esher News and Mail archives on the subject, at the minutes of the Full Council meetings at EBC, at the meetings of the various Overview and Scrutiny committees dealing with this topic last year, and I would invite them to reconsider their assertion that there was a move to close the Ember Centre.
I have never and would never put my name to such a proposal as I have made perfectly clear on three previous occasions, both in the press, in a Council meeting and in this blog.
I am not about to comment on the proximity between the Residents Association and the Vera Fletcher Hall, that has been a matter for the Standards Board previously and it is right to say that after investigation no breach was found to exist. That is and should be, the only stated position.
In answer to the question will I post details? Yes I will post details as and when I get them. As I have previously stated things are in the early stages, however I have received, along with other local Councillors an updated position and I am only too happy to share that.
Thursday, 10 December 2009
The Councillors Who Cried Wolf - the Ember Centre
Last year saw a campaign waged by the Thames Ditton Residents Association and the Lib Dems to oppose the closure of the Ember Centre, currently housed at the Vera Fletcher Hall.
They whipped up a frenzy amongst the users of that centre as well as the local community. The trouble was there was never any plan to close the Centre!
Some might argue that this was cynical politics exploiting the very people the Ember Centre is there to serve, by spreading scurrilous rumours with little or no substance. The reality was and remains that the Ember Centre was never going to be closed.
As readers of this blog will know, the plan was to look at the possibility of relocating the centre to a less costly venue, if, and only if, another venue could provide a similar level of amenity. No such site could be identified. Therefore the considerable drain on the taxpayer for the most costly of our day centres has continued unabated.
After much further effort and in partnership with Surrey County Council, an alternative site has now been identified. The site is in need of considerable work to bring it up to the required standard. However that work will take place soon and will be undertaken by Surrey.
It is unfortunate that with the undertaking and commitment in place to do that, some of those Councillors spreading rumours of closure previously, have fallen into their own trap.
In essence they appear to have made themselves suspicious of the Elmbridge administration by virtue of their own amateur spin-doctoring. Desperate to have massively prescriptive measures inserted in high-level policy documents, many of them appear to believe there will be some effort not to provide that which it has always been the intention to provide, namely first class facilities for mature residents in the Dittons.
Fortunately the resistance to such a well intentioned plan is only partial and relates solely to the over-prescription and suspicion generated by the Thames Ditton Residents and Lib Dem Councillors. Save for that the plans are in theory agreed by all parties and the hope and expectation is that the Ember Centre will thrive in its new surroundings.
Once the plans have been finalised I will post more details of the new home of the Centre as well as the facilities it will boast.
They whipped up a frenzy amongst the users of that centre as well as the local community. The trouble was there was never any plan to close the Centre!
Some might argue that this was cynical politics exploiting the very people the Ember Centre is there to serve, by spreading scurrilous rumours with little or no substance. The reality was and remains that the Ember Centre was never going to be closed.
As readers of this blog will know, the plan was to look at the possibility of relocating the centre to a less costly venue, if, and only if, another venue could provide a similar level of amenity. No such site could be identified. Therefore the considerable drain on the taxpayer for the most costly of our day centres has continued unabated.
After much further effort and in partnership with Surrey County Council, an alternative site has now been identified. The site is in need of considerable work to bring it up to the required standard. However that work will take place soon and will be undertaken by Surrey.
It is unfortunate that with the undertaking and commitment in place to do that, some of those Councillors spreading rumours of closure previously, have fallen into their own trap.
In essence they appear to have made themselves suspicious of the Elmbridge administration by virtue of their own amateur spin-doctoring. Desperate to have massively prescriptive measures inserted in high-level policy documents, many of them appear to believe there will be some effort not to provide that which it has always been the intention to provide, namely first class facilities for mature residents in the Dittons.
Fortunately the resistance to such a well intentioned plan is only partial and relates solely to the over-prescription and suspicion generated by the Thames Ditton Residents and Lib Dem Councillors. Save for that the plans are in theory agreed by all parties and the hope and expectation is that the Ember Centre will thrive in its new surroundings.
Once the plans have been finalised I will post more details of the new home of the Centre as well as the facilities it will boast.
A New Conservative Parliamentary Candidate - Why I believe we are very lucky
On 21st November in an historic open caucus Esher & Walton selected a new Conservative Parliamentary candidate. 700 people, many with no political affiliation attended to have their say. Some had been upset about the lack of a local candidate in the shortlist of 6. A much publicised campaign had been mounted to seek to put pressure on the local Party to shortlist someone currently living in the area.
Whilst I have every sympathy with the view that the candidate ought to have a good knowledge and understanding of the area, making arbitrary judgments based on where a candidate lives or doesn't live seems less than democratic. Esher and Walton chose from an extremely able shortlist of the 6 best applicants, of that I have no doubt. I say so in spite of the fact that I was one such applicant who failed to make the final 6.
Ultimately the caucus selected Dominic Raab to represent the Conservative Party at the next election.
I am delighted with that selection. Having met Dominic on several occasions, I have been impressed by his commitment, his perceptiveness, his clear intellect, and his deep-seated vision and drive to improve the lives of those he has been selected to serve.
I wish him every success in the election and hope that should he win, he will fulfil his undoubted potential. We as a constituency have been exceptionally lucky to find and elect such an able and outstanding individual.
Whilst I have every sympathy with the view that the candidate ought to have a good knowledge and understanding of the area, making arbitrary judgments based on where a candidate lives or doesn't live seems less than democratic. Esher and Walton chose from an extremely able shortlist of the 6 best applicants, of that I have no doubt. I say so in spite of the fact that I was one such applicant who failed to make the final 6.
Ultimately the caucus selected Dominic Raab to represent the Conservative Party at the next election.
I am delighted with that selection. Having met Dominic on several occasions, I have been impressed by his commitment, his perceptiveness, his clear intellect, and his deep-seated vision and drive to improve the lives of those he has been selected to serve.
I wish him every success in the election and hope that should he win, he will fulfil his undoubted potential. We as a constituency have been exceptionally lucky to find and elect such an able and outstanding individual.
Monday, 21 September 2009
St. James Estate, Windmill Lane
To those who are not immediate neighbours, the news that there maybe development taking place of the currently empty site adjacent to the St. James Estate at its border with Windmill Lane, may come as a surprise. As a member of the Local Planning Authority I cannot adopt a view one way or another on the issue.
However, for those who were unaware or unable to attend the recent exhibition regarding the site, and have comments or observations to make on the proposals, please click on the title of this post and it will take you to the St. James website. The office dealing with this matter is the Leatherhead office, and I know Matthew Townend is keen to here the observations, views, criticisms of all within our community to the proposals.
Alternatively please contact:
St James Group Limited
St James House
26 Bridge Street
Leatherhead
Surrey
KT22 8BZ
Tel: 01372 364 500
Fax: 01372 364 501
It is crucially important that anyone who wishes to comment does so as soon as possible. I did attend the exhibition and will assist as best I can whilst maintaining my objectivity.
However, for those who were unaware or unable to attend the recent exhibition regarding the site, and have comments or observations to make on the proposals, please click on the title of this post and it will take you to the St. James website. The office dealing with this matter is the Leatherhead office, and I know Matthew Townend is keen to here the observations, views, criticisms of all within our community to the proposals.
Alternatively please contact:
St James Group Limited
St James House
26 Bridge Street
Leatherhead
Surrey
KT22 8BZ
Tel: 01372 364 500
Fax: 01372 364 501
It is crucially important that anyone who wishes to comment does so as soon as possible. I did attend the exhibition and will assist as best I can whilst maintaining my objectivity.
Autumn Fun at Mannys!
Many of you will already have made use of the wonderful new facilities at Manny's on Fleece Road. However, it wasn't until Saturday that the extension to his shop was formally opened. For those who missed it, it was great fun with balloon animals made by clowns, our Long ditton resident DJ Ray Rainbow, and some expert face painting.
Whilst the event was great fun, what it signifies is extremely important. Manny has done enormously good work in Long Ditton, keeping community spirit at the core of his business, and offering a real village centre. The opening demonstrates those core values that we need to strive to hold on to amid post office closures and the ever present threats of anti-social behaviour. Manny provides a beacon of hope in our community for the future of our village and for the future of our area.
The Conservative party wish him all the best and will help him to keep our community spirit alive and well.
Whilst the event was great fun, what it signifies is extremely important. Manny has done enormously good work in Long Ditton, keeping community spirit at the core of his business, and offering a real village centre. The opening demonstrates those core values that we need to strive to hold on to amid post office closures and the ever present threats of anti-social behaviour. Manny provides a beacon of hope in our community for the future of our village and for the future of our area.
The Conservative party wish him all the best and will help him to keep our community spirit alive and well.
Thursday, 23 July 2009
Lib Dems Refuse To Back Surrey Police
As many of you will be aware Surrey Police have suffered from massive underfunding at the hands of the Labour government since 1997. As an example funding per head of population in Surrey has fallen from £96 per head to £93 per head in the period. Overall the funding has been slashed to levels that have meant Surrey Police simply cannot function to protect our community.
After setting their share of the Council tax rate to try and accomodate the massive shortfall from Central Government, Surrey were then capped by Central Government and the rate they set was reduced. The reduction works out at £3.25 per council tax payer. Whilst this may sound like good news in one sense what it actually means is that over £1,000,000 will have to be spent by Local Councils in reissuing Council tax bills in Surrey. This includes Elmbridge. Overall it will cots the taxpayer dear.
In addition it will mean around 35 less officers on our streets, a reduction in Community Support Officers and a significant reduction in crime prevention capabilities.
At a full meeting of the Council held on 22nd July, it was proposed that, although Elmbridge could do nothing to stop what the government had done in capping Surrey Police, as a Council Elmbridge should make clear in the strongest possible terms its condemnation of such attacks on the safety and amenity of our community.
The motion was proposed by Conservative Cllr Simon Dodsworth and received unanimous support from all the Conservative Councillors. A number of the Residents Association Councillors agreed with others abstaining and a small minority voting against.
It was the Liberal Democrats who voted en masse against making such a stand. It was the Liberal Democrats who refused to stand up for the people of Surrey and for our police force. Both Councillors Fairbank and Kapadia voted with other Liberal Democrats to send no message at all about the scandalous underfunding of our police. Cllr Fairbank sought to suggest that it was all a political game. Crime is not a game it is a terrifying ordeal that we have the right to expect our Police to be able to deal with. Cutting their funding is not right, or fair, or just.
It would be interesting to see what reaction Cllr Fairbank might have if he became the victim of crime, something significantly more likely if there is no support from community leaders to take a stand against the iniquity of Government policy to our County.
If you agree that Surrey Police need our support drop me a line at tgrey@elmbridge.gov.uk
After setting their share of the Council tax rate to try and accomodate the massive shortfall from Central Government, Surrey were then capped by Central Government and the rate they set was reduced. The reduction works out at £3.25 per council tax payer. Whilst this may sound like good news in one sense what it actually means is that over £1,000,000 will have to be spent by Local Councils in reissuing Council tax bills in Surrey. This includes Elmbridge. Overall it will cots the taxpayer dear.
In addition it will mean around 35 less officers on our streets, a reduction in Community Support Officers and a significant reduction in crime prevention capabilities.
At a full meeting of the Council held on 22nd July, it was proposed that, although Elmbridge could do nothing to stop what the government had done in capping Surrey Police, as a Council Elmbridge should make clear in the strongest possible terms its condemnation of such attacks on the safety and amenity of our community.
The motion was proposed by Conservative Cllr Simon Dodsworth and received unanimous support from all the Conservative Councillors. A number of the Residents Association Councillors agreed with others abstaining and a small minority voting against.
It was the Liberal Democrats who voted en masse against making such a stand. It was the Liberal Democrats who refused to stand up for the people of Surrey and for our police force. Both Councillors Fairbank and Kapadia voted with other Liberal Democrats to send no message at all about the scandalous underfunding of our police. Cllr Fairbank sought to suggest that it was all a political game. Crime is not a game it is a terrifying ordeal that we have the right to expect our Police to be able to deal with. Cutting their funding is not right, or fair, or just.
It would be interesting to see what reaction Cllr Fairbank might have if he became the victim of crime, something significantly more likely if there is no support from community leaders to take a stand against the iniquity of Government policy to our County.
If you agree that Surrey Police need our support drop me a line at tgrey@elmbridge.gov.uk
Monday, 20 July 2009
The LibDems Hold An Open Meeting In Secret - Did You Know About It?
On Friday night (17th July) The Liberal Democrats teamed up with the Hinchley Wood Residents Association to hold a meeting regarding the Elmbridge Core Strategy. The Core Strategy is a document of fundamental importance to future planning and development in Elmbridge. it sets out the vision for Elmbridge to 2026, and tries to accomodate the unrealistc and arbitrary housing targets forced upon Elmbridge by Central Government. The Council is holding several meetings to get the views of as many people as possible.
At first blush it may seem like a good idea to hold a meeting in Long Ditton. I don't disagree. However, you would think if you were going to hold such a meeting you might tell people. You might think you would at the very least tell the third Councillor for the area. However, for reasons best known to them, the LibDems chose not to do so. No Conservative was informed, no Conservative was invited to take part. It appears from e-mails I have since been shown that there was a deliberate attempt made to exclude me and those known to be Conservatives, from attending.
This seems to be a somewhat foolish approach and an attempt to unnecessarily politicise an issue fundamental to our community. If what you want to do by calling a meeting is get as many views heard as possible, then one would think that Democracy would dictate as many people as possible should be notified of such a meeting. You would think that if one of the Ward Councillors is part of the Conservative administration at Elmbridge they might be the perfect person to pass on the views of the community to the powers that be. You might also think that given I am the Vice Chair of the Elmbridge Planning Committee, I might have some information on the Core Strategy that would be of use.
On learning of the date set for the meeting I contacted Cllr Roy Taylor, Leader of Elmbridge Council, Cllr Mike Bennison Surrey County Councillor for Hinchley Wood, and four other senior members of the Conservative administration at Elmbridge, so that they could hear direct the views of our community and give effect to them, thereby ensuring that at least the meeting wasn't a total waste of time for those of you who attended.
The meetings organised by Elmbridge will continue and if you were unable to get to the meeting on Friday, or alternatively didn't know about it, because it was a secret, please do look at the Elmbridge website (a link is on this page) for the date of the next meeting and at other ways to register your views. The complete Core Strategy document is available online for further consumption. In particular I recommend reading CPA 13 which relates to the Dittons and Hinchley Wood and is helpful for us all in understanding the possible impact of the scheme.
Please do contact me for any further information. If sufficient people would like another meeting I am happy to arrange one, and I will invite EVERYONE! I had hoped to do so in any event and to do so after the school holidays when more people would be around. As I say please contact me if you would like a further meeting or simply want more information.
I am extremely disappointed that the Lib Dems have failed to live up to their name. Democracy conveys upon us all not only the right to speak, but the right to be heard by all. Usurping or deliberately restricting that right is anything but democratic. I would strongly advise our local LibDems to familiarise themselves with the basic tenets of democracy if they are going to continue to call themselves Liberal "Democrats."
I have, and will continue to try to work with them for the good of Long Ditton. They appear not to want the same thing. That is a matter for them. I hope they see sense and realise that ultimately the only people who suffer by their tactics are those who live and work in our community.
At first blush it may seem like a good idea to hold a meeting in Long Ditton. I don't disagree. However, you would think if you were going to hold such a meeting you might tell people. You might think you would at the very least tell the third Councillor for the area. However, for reasons best known to them, the LibDems chose not to do so. No Conservative was informed, no Conservative was invited to take part. It appears from e-mails I have since been shown that there was a deliberate attempt made to exclude me and those known to be Conservatives, from attending.
This seems to be a somewhat foolish approach and an attempt to unnecessarily politicise an issue fundamental to our community. If what you want to do by calling a meeting is get as many views heard as possible, then one would think that Democracy would dictate as many people as possible should be notified of such a meeting. You would think that if one of the Ward Councillors is part of the Conservative administration at Elmbridge they might be the perfect person to pass on the views of the community to the powers that be. You might also think that given I am the Vice Chair of the Elmbridge Planning Committee, I might have some information on the Core Strategy that would be of use.
On learning of the date set for the meeting I contacted Cllr Roy Taylor, Leader of Elmbridge Council, Cllr Mike Bennison Surrey County Councillor for Hinchley Wood, and four other senior members of the Conservative administration at Elmbridge, so that they could hear direct the views of our community and give effect to them, thereby ensuring that at least the meeting wasn't a total waste of time for those of you who attended.
The meetings organised by Elmbridge will continue and if you were unable to get to the meeting on Friday, or alternatively didn't know about it, because it was a secret, please do look at the Elmbridge website (a link is on this page) for the date of the next meeting and at other ways to register your views. The complete Core Strategy document is available online for further consumption. In particular I recommend reading CPA 13 which relates to the Dittons and Hinchley Wood and is helpful for us all in understanding the possible impact of the scheme.
Please do contact me for any further information. If sufficient people would like another meeting I am happy to arrange one, and I will invite EVERYONE! I had hoped to do so in any event and to do so after the school holidays when more people would be around. As I say please contact me if you would like a further meeting or simply want more information.
I am extremely disappointed that the Lib Dems have failed to live up to their name. Democracy conveys upon us all not only the right to speak, but the right to be heard by all. Usurping or deliberately restricting that right is anything but democratic. I would strongly advise our local LibDems to familiarise themselves with the basic tenets of democracy if they are going to continue to call themselves Liberal "Democrats."
I have, and will continue to try to work with them for the good of Long Ditton. They appear not to want the same thing. That is a matter for them. I hope they see sense and realise that ultimately the only people who suffer by their tactics are those who live and work in our community.
Tuesday, 30 June 2009
Gordon Brown's Empty Policies
It may come as a surprise to many reading this blog to find quoted verbatim the recent policy from a Labour government. However, when one actually reads the pledges made in "Building a Better Britain" the preposterous and desperate nature of the promises do this government more damage than any opposition could hope to inflict. I have taken the first three as examples. Over the coming weeks I will look at the others, there being 12 in all, and ask some of the questions that spring to mind. Here they are:
"1. CLEANING UP POLITICS
To rebuild trust in politics, we will create an independent regulator for parliamentary standards and a statutory Code of Conduct for all MPs.
We will further reform the House of Lords, including the process of removing the hereditary principle. And we will now bring forward a draft bill for a smaller and democratically constituted second chamber."
"We will create an independent regulator..." Given the whole expenses row is about the misuse of our money, I am bound to ask who exactly will pay for this independent regulator? Gordon Brown? Alistair Darling? Northern Rock? HBOS? RBS? Fred Goodwin? Or perhaps it will be us the taxpayer...Oh yes it appears it will be. So Labour propose to charge the British people for a police force to stop them stealing our money...It seems a little ironic. Perhaps they might like to take a lesson from David Cameron and get rid of the sort of people who need policing in the first place.
The pomposity with which Labour has treated the Upper House since 1997 seems to know no bounds. First Tony Blair makes swingeing changes to its constitution and then sort of forgets to put anything in place that might possibly act as a sensible and considered critical friend to his government. For years we have waited and for what? Now Mr. Brown proposes to sort it all out. After what sort of consultation? After asking whom? After seeking what authority? It seems somewhat perverse to embark upon constitutional reform when there are very serious question marks about Gordon Brown's constitutional entitlement to lead this Country at all. As I recall nobody elected him Prime Minister. Apparently that doesn't stop someone seeking to reform half of Parliament.
"JOBS & SKILLS
We will not lose another generation to worklessness. We will guarantee a sixth form, college or apprenticeship place to all school leavers. From next year, every person under 25 who has been out of work for a year will have to take a job, training, or work experience place. Adults who have been out of work for six months will get help with setting up a business, skills training, or volunteering opportunities."
Once again it appears Mr. Brown, with breathtaking arrogance, will solve unemployment...Forgive me I should say "worklessness." If they don't use the word unemployment we might not realise! Given he put us in this mess I suppose it's the least Mr. Brown can do. However, forgive me if I am not convinced by the posturing. What in essence this means is that benefits will be taken away from the unemployed, even though they are not earning (or are earning at a rate well below the poverty line). It is quite simply an excuse to disenfranchise a whole sub-class of school leavers coming into a working environment where there are no jobs and no prospect of jobs. Rather than ensure these poor souls don't starve, the government chooses to spend millions on a programme to find excuses to lower the unemployment figures. "Stick them on a course then they aren't unemployed."
Have the government learnt nothing? Currently the predictions for graduates leaving university this summer are that 72% will be unable to find anything other than casual work. Why? Because the whole basis of the education they have spent their lives and money working towards, has been devalued. Everyone has a degree now, whether in pottery or law, medicine or film studies. Education and application have been entirely undermined by Labour. And now in the most hideous stroke of irony the very government that has made so many unemployable by virtue of economic travesty and insane education policy, seeks to find ways of hiding the misery they have inflicted by manipulating the unemployment figures and hanging a generation out to dry.
"A NEW ECONOMY
We will pursue a new, more active industrial policy to drive growth and create the high value jobs of the future. We will invest to ensure that Britain can lead in the new industries of the global economy, ensuring broadband access for all by 2012 and working towards a nationwide high-speed broadband network by 2016."
"We will ensure that Britain’s economy is underpinned by a world class modern infrastructure and that we have world-leading capabilities in the ‘network’ industries of the future – low carbon, biotechnology, life sciences, digital, advanced manufacturing and financial services."
"To support the key technology-based sectors of the future we will establish a new £150 million Innovation Fund which will over time lever up to £1 billion of private sector funding."
Broadband for all...Great...Guess who's paying? Is it Gordon Brown? Is it Alistair Darling? Is it Fred Goodwin? Is it HBOS? Is it RBS? Err no...that's right its us again. Except this time we don't get the right to broadband from our tax contributions, nor do we get it from the licence fee we have to pay to watch television, nor do we get it at a cost from our Internet Service Provider. (Don't worry we have to pay for an ISP separately). No, in a one-time never to be repeated offer we can each join the information super-highway and head at speed to the "virtual jobcentre plus" site for only £6. Can't afford it? Don't worry if you're under 25 you can go on a course and earn virtually nothing, and be trained for a job that doesn't exist, thus ensuring you can afford an extra £6 in order to surf the net looking for a job until you are old enough to claim your non-existent pension.
Forgive my cynicism but I am not convinced that underpinning the economy is really the solution to the massive short-term problems of unemployment, deflation, a housing market in dire straits, a pensions system in collapse and a gross domestic product that would make Liechtenstein blush...
For a solution that has a fighting chance of working you may choose to visit the Conservative website and see what the opposition propose. The link is on this page. In the meantime we watch as Brown sinks. Let's just hope and pray he doesn't take us with him...
"1. CLEANING UP POLITICS
To rebuild trust in politics, we will create an independent regulator for parliamentary standards and a statutory Code of Conduct for all MPs.
We will further reform the House of Lords, including the process of removing the hereditary principle. And we will now bring forward a draft bill for a smaller and democratically constituted second chamber."
"We will create an independent regulator..." Given the whole expenses row is about the misuse of our money, I am bound to ask who exactly will pay for this independent regulator? Gordon Brown? Alistair Darling? Northern Rock? HBOS? RBS? Fred Goodwin? Or perhaps it will be us the taxpayer...Oh yes it appears it will be. So Labour propose to charge the British people for a police force to stop them stealing our money...It seems a little ironic. Perhaps they might like to take a lesson from David Cameron and get rid of the sort of people who need policing in the first place.
The pomposity with which Labour has treated the Upper House since 1997 seems to know no bounds. First Tony Blair makes swingeing changes to its constitution and then sort of forgets to put anything in place that might possibly act as a sensible and considered critical friend to his government. For years we have waited and for what? Now Mr. Brown proposes to sort it all out. After what sort of consultation? After asking whom? After seeking what authority? It seems somewhat perverse to embark upon constitutional reform when there are very serious question marks about Gordon Brown's constitutional entitlement to lead this Country at all. As I recall nobody elected him Prime Minister. Apparently that doesn't stop someone seeking to reform half of Parliament.
"JOBS & SKILLS
We will not lose another generation to worklessness. We will guarantee a sixth form, college or apprenticeship place to all school leavers. From next year, every person under 25 who has been out of work for a year will have to take a job, training, or work experience place. Adults who have been out of work for six months will get help with setting up a business, skills training, or volunteering opportunities."
Once again it appears Mr. Brown, with breathtaking arrogance, will solve unemployment...Forgive me I should say "worklessness." If they don't use the word unemployment we might not realise! Given he put us in this mess I suppose it's the least Mr. Brown can do. However, forgive me if I am not convinced by the posturing. What in essence this means is that benefits will be taken away from the unemployed, even though they are not earning (or are earning at a rate well below the poverty line). It is quite simply an excuse to disenfranchise a whole sub-class of school leavers coming into a working environment where there are no jobs and no prospect of jobs. Rather than ensure these poor souls don't starve, the government chooses to spend millions on a programme to find excuses to lower the unemployment figures. "Stick them on a course then they aren't unemployed."
Have the government learnt nothing? Currently the predictions for graduates leaving university this summer are that 72% will be unable to find anything other than casual work. Why? Because the whole basis of the education they have spent their lives and money working towards, has been devalued. Everyone has a degree now, whether in pottery or law, medicine or film studies. Education and application have been entirely undermined by Labour. And now in the most hideous stroke of irony the very government that has made so many unemployable by virtue of economic travesty and insane education policy, seeks to find ways of hiding the misery they have inflicted by manipulating the unemployment figures and hanging a generation out to dry.
"A NEW ECONOMY
We will pursue a new, more active industrial policy to drive growth and create the high value jobs of the future. We will invest to ensure that Britain can lead in the new industries of the global economy, ensuring broadband access for all by 2012 and working towards a nationwide high-speed broadband network by 2016."
"We will ensure that Britain’s economy is underpinned by a world class modern infrastructure and that we have world-leading capabilities in the ‘network’ industries of the future – low carbon, biotechnology, life sciences, digital, advanced manufacturing and financial services."
"To support the key technology-based sectors of the future we will establish a new £150 million Innovation Fund which will over time lever up to £1 billion of private sector funding."
Broadband for all...Great...Guess who's paying? Is it Gordon Brown? Is it Alistair Darling? Is it Fred Goodwin? Is it HBOS? Is it RBS? Err no...that's right its us again. Except this time we don't get the right to broadband from our tax contributions, nor do we get it from the licence fee we have to pay to watch television, nor do we get it at a cost from our Internet Service Provider. (Don't worry we have to pay for an ISP separately). No, in a one-time never to be repeated offer we can each join the information super-highway and head at speed to the "virtual jobcentre plus" site for only £6. Can't afford it? Don't worry if you're under 25 you can go on a course and earn virtually nothing, and be trained for a job that doesn't exist, thus ensuring you can afford an extra £6 in order to surf the net looking for a job until you are old enough to claim your non-existent pension.
Forgive my cynicism but I am not convinced that underpinning the economy is really the solution to the massive short-term problems of unemployment, deflation, a housing market in dire straits, a pensions system in collapse and a gross domestic product that would make Liechtenstein blush...
For a solution that has a fighting chance of working you may choose to visit the Conservative website and see what the opposition propose. The link is on this page. In the meantime we watch as Brown sinks. Let's just hope and pray he doesn't take us with him...
Wild at Play in Long Ditton
Good news. After much consultation we have been able to launch the "Wild at Play" scheme in Long Ditton. As an Elmbridge scheme it is something I feel strongly offers a valuable outlet for younger members of our community to play in a controlled and healthy environment, which is as safe as possible.
Following a consultation with local people and parents, Community Play Rangers have introduced a Wild at Play Passport for the play sessions at Stockes Fields, Long Ditton. This passport will ensure children's safety while they are in the care of an experienced team.
The play sessions are free and the children have free choice as to what to play and whilst the hope is to make it as easy as possible for them to attend, the organisers are also extremely conscious of their safety at all times; including when they make their way to the sessions and when they leave. To this effect, they have issued a brand new Wild at Play Passport and medical form. The Wild at Play Passport must be filled in if you want your child to participate. Children hand their passport to a Play Ranger when they arrive and collect it when they are leaving the site.
The medical form distributed with the passport will give any information on allergies or medical conditions which will alert the staff to make sure your children enjoy their time within the site.
Cllr Jan Fuller, Portfolio Holder for Leisure and Cultural Services said: ‘While the Community Play Ranger project provides a valuable service for children and young people, the Wild at Play Passport will ensure your children are safe while making the most of playing outside in the fresh air in their local community’.
The Play Rangers meet every other Thursday at the cemetery car park, Rectory Road, Long Ditton, 3.30 pm to 3.45 pm and are back at the car park by 5.00 pm.
If you try to find them, they can be spotted easily. Just look out for their bright yellow jumpers!
For further information, including times and dates, please log onto www.elmbridge.gov.uk/play or simply click on the title of this post to be re-directed. Alternatively phone 01372 474576 or email leisure@elmbridge.gov.uk
Following a consultation with local people and parents, Community Play Rangers have introduced a Wild at Play Passport for the play sessions at Stockes Fields, Long Ditton. This passport will ensure children's safety while they are in the care of an experienced team.
The play sessions are free and the children have free choice as to what to play and whilst the hope is to make it as easy as possible for them to attend, the organisers are also extremely conscious of their safety at all times; including when they make their way to the sessions and when they leave. To this effect, they have issued a brand new Wild at Play Passport and medical form. The Wild at Play Passport must be filled in if you want your child to participate. Children hand their passport to a Play Ranger when they arrive and collect it when they are leaving the site.
The medical form distributed with the passport will give any information on allergies or medical conditions which will alert the staff to make sure your children enjoy their time within the site.
Cllr Jan Fuller, Portfolio Holder for Leisure and Cultural Services said: ‘While the Community Play Ranger project provides a valuable service for children and young people, the Wild at Play Passport will ensure your children are safe while making the most of playing outside in the fresh air in their local community’.
The Play Rangers meet every other Thursday at the cemetery car park, Rectory Road, Long Ditton, 3.30 pm to 3.45 pm and are back at the car park by 5.00 pm.
If you try to find them, they can be spotted easily. Just look out for their bright yellow jumpers!
For further information, including times and dates, please log onto www.elmbridge.gov.uk/play or simply click on the title of this post to be re-directed. Alternatively phone 01372 474576 or email leisure@elmbridge.gov.uk
Wednesday, 17 June 2009
Ian Taylor MBE, MP
By now many of you will have heard about Ian's decision to stand down as our MP at the next election. For 22 years Ian has been a dedicated servant to our constituency and it was with disappointment that I learnt of his decision. Before the speculation begins that it may be something to do with expenses I should say that there has been no suggestion that he has done anything outside the rules, or even close to the grey area of the rules.
Much has been made of his "second home" and whilst the second home policy maybe a matter for the Kelly report to deal with for the future, it should be noted that Ian operated as our MP, and continues to do so, well within the prevailing rules. For those who wish to know more a copy of Ian's letter of resignation can be found on the Esher and Walton Conservatives website (a link is on this page).
Ian has remained true to his principles throughout his time as our MP, and whilst some may not have agreed with him on certain issues, all have tremendous respect for his consistency of mind and his unswerving dedication to the interests of all those in our constituency. He will be sorely missed.
To those who have speculated about his successor I would respectfully suggest that a modicum of respect for Ian's dedication ought to lead them away from such rumour-mongering. When a figure as respected as Ian makes the decision he has, a level of mature reflection on his achievements is the least he deserves, not an effort "to fill dead man's shoes."
On a personal note I wish him and Carol every future success and happiness in whatever they choose to do. Ian, you are gentleman and we will miss you.
Much has been made of his "second home" and whilst the second home policy maybe a matter for the Kelly report to deal with for the future, it should be noted that Ian operated as our MP, and continues to do so, well within the prevailing rules. For those who wish to know more a copy of Ian's letter of resignation can be found on the Esher and Walton Conservatives website (a link is on this page).
Ian has remained true to his principles throughout his time as our MP, and whilst some may not have agreed with him on certain issues, all have tremendous respect for his consistency of mind and his unswerving dedication to the interests of all those in our constituency. He will be sorely missed.
To those who have speculated about his successor I would respectfully suggest that a modicum of respect for Ian's dedication ought to lead them away from such rumour-mongering. When a figure as respected as Ian makes the decision he has, a level of mature reflection on his achievements is the least he deserves, not an effort "to fill dead man's shoes."
On a personal note I wish him and Carol every future success and happiness in whatever they choose to do. Ian, you are gentleman and we will miss you.
Friday, 5 June 2009
The County Council Election Results
As the dust settles after yesterday's election things in Long Ditton have changed very little. Our County Councillor remains Peter Hickman of the Thames Ditton & Weston Green Residents Association. Congratulations to him on his re-elecetion. It would be nice to think that in spite of the name of the party he represents Long Ditton will perhaps get equal attention in his second term as County Councillor.
Whilst I know Redvers Cunningham is disappointed at failing to win the seat and get the opportunity to get the best for our community, I know he sends his thanks to those of you who have supported him and ensured that the Conservative share of the vote increased over the figure in 2005. I hope Redvers will stand for election again in the future. Local government is the poorer for his absence. Let's hope it doesn't remain that way for too long.
Whilst I know Redvers Cunningham is disappointed at failing to win the seat and get the opportunity to get the best for our community, I know he sends his thanks to those of you who have supported him and ensured that the Conservative share of the vote increased over the figure in 2005. I hope Redvers will stand for election again in the future. Local government is the poorer for his absence. Let's hope it doesn't remain that way for too long.
Thursday, 4 June 2009
Beware those who claim to be non-political
I read with sadness the latest news from the Thames Ditton and Weston Green Residents Association regarding the recent planning application for the Moore Place site in Esher.
Sadness borne of their failure to mention in their missives the resounding support for the recent planning application for the site from residents of Esher, and from the Esher Ward Councillor present at the meeting and charged with representing the Ward. No mention of the fact that the new proposal would be exactly the same footprint size as the existing building. No mention of the fact that the existing building was not considered to be a building worthy of protection by English Heritage, in spite of its age and history, because it is just not a very good example of a building of such age.
Equally they accuse others of voting en bloc. This verges on the comical. As with every planning application of any note, Sandown Park, Hampton Court Station(aka The Jolly Boatman) and of course Moore Place itself, the Thames Ditton Residents Association to name but one, have voted en bloc to stop any development.
The issue of Moore Place is symptomatic of a politicisation of the planning system that is profoundly out of place. Each Councillor should make up his or her mind in a sensible and objective fashion based on planning considerations only, having heard the open debate held at the public meetings of the respective planning committee. Can en masse blocking of a planning application be a lawful position given the duty each Councillor owes?
I re-iterate for the benefit of those who would drag the system into the mire that no one within the Council, Conservative or otherwise has sought to improperly influence my decision over an application, however big or small and I am confident that the same can be said for every other Conservative member of Elmbridge. I invite other parties to proclaim likewise unless they feel unable to do so...
Sadness borne of their failure to mention in their missives the resounding support for the recent planning application for the site from residents of Esher, and from the Esher Ward Councillor present at the meeting and charged with representing the Ward. No mention of the fact that the new proposal would be exactly the same footprint size as the existing building. No mention of the fact that the existing building was not considered to be a building worthy of protection by English Heritage, in spite of its age and history, because it is just not a very good example of a building of such age.
Equally they accuse others of voting en bloc. This verges on the comical. As with every planning application of any note, Sandown Park, Hampton Court Station(aka The Jolly Boatman) and of course Moore Place itself, the Thames Ditton Residents Association to name but one, have voted en bloc to stop any development.
The issue of Moore Place is symptomatic of a politicisation of the planning system that is profoundly out of place. Each Councillor should make up his or her mind in a sensible and objective fashion based on planning considerations only, having heard the open debate held at the public meetings of the respective planning committee. Can en masse blocking of a planning application be a lawful position given the duty each Councillor owes?
I re-iterate for the benefit of those who would drag the system into the mire that no one within the Council, Conservative or otherwise has sought to improperly influence my decision over an application, however big or small and I am confident that the same can be said for every other Conservative member of Elmbridge. I invite other parties to proclaim likewise unless they feel unable to do so...
THE BIG DAY!
Please remember to vote today. As always it is only through voting that you can express your frustration or anger, or dare I say agreement with a political view or party.
Remember though that today is not about MPs at Westminster. Today is about Europe and Surrey County Council. I would ask everyone to consider if they feel properly represented by their County Councillor? I would ask everyone to consider if they are properly represented by their MEPs. If you feel you are, vote accordingly. If you feel it is time for change there is only one way to make that happen - VOTE!
Remember though that today is not about MPs at Westminster. Today is about Europe and Surrey County Council. I would ask everyone to consider if they feel properly represented by their County Councillor? I would ask everyone to consider if they are properly represented by their MEPs. If you feel you are, vote accordingly. If you feel it is time for change there is only one way to make that happen - VOTE!
Friday, 8 May 2009
For the forseeable future you can follow the up coming election campaign and my experiences as a local Councillor by simply looking on the panel to the right that gives access to my Twitter account.
Monday, 27 April 2009
Garden Grabbing - What a Conservative Government would do
Great news for all of us in Long Ditton suffering with the threat of unconscionable over-development. The following is the up to date position from Caroline Spellman MP Shadow Sec. of State for Communities & Local Government:
Following Conservative pressure during the recent Planning Bill, Labour Ministers have conceded that a review is needed into the extent of housing development on gardens (so-called 'garden grabbing'). This is a small but significant step since the Labour Government has previously been in denial that any problem exists.
Local people are increasingly powerless to protect the character of their neighbourhood, and communities are suffering from the extra burden being placed on local infrastructure. Labour's planning rules prevent the development of new homes that the public actually want - family homes with sufficient parking spaces and gardens for children to play in.
The DCLG has written to every local planning authority asking them to provide data on the extent of garden grabbing.
As you may know, Conservatives have been consistently calling for reforms to give councils more powers to stop unwanted infill development and garden grabbing in local communities. As a party the Conservatives have pledged to:
- Stop gardens being classified as brownfield land.
- Abolish Whitehall density targets and maximum parking standards (any guidelines should be a matter for councils' local discretion).
- Amend PPS3, returning to the 1992 wording of planning guidance. This gave explicit and flexible discretion to local councils to prevent over-development in local neighbourhoods, protect the character of an established residential area, and deter the speculative demolition of sound housing.
Following Conservative pressure during the recent Planning Bill, Labour Ministers have conceded that a review is needed into the extent of housing development on gardens (so-called 'garden grabbing'). This is a small but significant step since the Labour Government has previously been in denial that any problem exists.
Local people are increasingly powerless to protect the character of their neighbourhood, and communities are suffering from the extra burden being placed on local infrastructure. Labour's planning rules prevent the development of new homes that the public actually want - family homes with sufficient parking spaces and gardens for children to play in.
The DCLG has written to every local planning authority asking them to provide data on the extent of garden grabbing.
As you may know, Conservatives have been consistently calling for reforms to give councils more powers to stop unwanted infill development and garden grabbing in local communities. As a party the Conservatives have pledged to:
- Stop gardens being classified as brownfield land.
- Abolish Whitehall density targets and maximum parking standards (any guidelines should be a matter for councils' local discretion).
- Amend PPS3, returning to the 1992 wording of planning guidance. This gave explicit and flexible discretion to local councils to prevent over-development in local neighbourhoods, protect the character of an established residential area, and deter the speculative demolition of sound housing.
Wednesday, 8 April 2009
Latest News in Long Ditton
Reporting Pot-Holes
The state of our roads is terrible. Please contact Surrey County Council to report any pot holes. As many have commented it seems to take a long time to get them fixed, but let’s all be vigilant and do what we can. The more reports they get, the more chance something will be done.
Fly-Tipping
I have spent a lot of time recently in liaison with PCSO Richard Platt of Surrey Police as well as officers at Elmbridge in order to resolve the problem of littering and fly-tipping at the Fleece Road end of Windmill Lane. Whilst things have certainly improved fly-tipping does continue in the area. It is anti-social, unhygienic and potentially hazardous. If you see any instances of fly-tipping please contact your local Councillor or contact Elmbrige direct.
Crime
The good news is that since the end of October Long Ditton crime figures have been kept very low, with a total of 60 crimes reported. We are aware, though that some crimes go unreported. Please, if you or someone you know is the victim of crime, report it. Even if you don’t get the resolution to your particular incident that you may hope for, the mere fact of reporting a crime means that things like CCTV crime prevention techniques and crime detection techniques will be given the necessary funding in our area to ensure crime is not allowed to escalate in the future.
Lamp-Posts
In February I invited Ian Taylor MP to look around Long Ditton with me to look specifically at the issue of broken, damaged or disused lamp posts. As many of you know there are numerous examples of such lamp posts. Many are in a dangerous state with exposed wiring.
As a result of his experiences in Long Ditton Ian is doing all he can to put pressure on the government to make their contractors (EDF) perform the task of replacing and refitting our lamp-posts.
I wanted Ian to see first hand the unsightly, damaged, unfit, and downright dangerous state of some of our lamp posts. I know he is very concerned about the potential for injury, as well as the likely effect on crime by having lamp posts that do not work in dark or isolated areas.
Issues Coming Up
Currently on the agenda is the pigeon proofing of the railway bridge over Ewell Road. This is the responsibility of South West Trains (SWT) and is likely to take some time to conclude given the backlog of works they have at present. However, we will continue to press for a resolution.
The state of our roads is terrible. Please contact Surrey County Council to report any pot holes. As many have commented it seems to take a long time to get them fixed, but let’s all be vigilant and do what we can. The more reports they get, the more chance something will be done.
Fly-Tipping
I have spent a lot of time recently in liaison with PCSO Richard Platt of Surrey Police as well as officers at Elmbridge in order to resolve the problem of littering and fly-tipping at the Fleece Road end of Windmill Lane. Whilst things have certainly improved fly-tipping does continue in the area. It is anti-social, unhygienic and potentially hazardous. If you see any instances of fly-tipping please contact your local Councillor or contact Elmbrige direct.
Crime
The good news is that since the end of October Long Ditton crime figures have been kept very low, with a total of 60 crimes reported. We are aware, though that some crimes go unreported. Please, if you or someone you know is the victim of crime, report it. Even if you don’t get the resolution to your particular incident that you may hope for, the mere fact of reporting a crime means that things like CCTV crime prevention techniques and crime detection techniques will be given the necessary funding in our area to ensure crime is not allowed to escalate in the future.
Lamp-Posts
In February I invited Ian Taylor MP to look around Long Ditton with me to look specifically at the issue of broken, damaged or disused lamp posts. As many of you know there are numerous examples of such lamp posts. Many are in a dangerous state with exposed wiring.
As a result of his experiences in Long Ditton Ian is doing all he can to put pressure on the government to make their contractors (EDF) perform the task of replacing and refitting our lamp-posts.
I wanted Ian to see first hand the unsightly, damaged, unfit, and downright dangerous state of some of our lamp posts. I know he is very concerned about the potential for injury, as well as the likely effect on crime by having lamp posts that do not work in dark or isolated areas.
Issues Coming Up
Currently on the agenda is the pigeon proofing of the railway bridge over Ewell Road. This is the responsibility of South West Trains (SWT) and is likely to take some time to conclude given the backlog of works they have at present. However, we will continue to press for a resolution.
Tuesday, 3 March 2009
The Elmbridge Budget 2009: A Necessary and Prudent Budget
The recent budget delivered by the Conservative Administration to the Elmbridge Borough Council on 25th February 2009 was a prudent and careful one, which proposed a 4.9% increase in the Elmbridge share of Council Tax. For the avoidance of doubt this is a very small share of the total Council tax levied with the majority going to Surrey County Council who set their own rate. In real terms the Elmbridge share equates to an increase of 17pence per week to a band D household.
In opposing such a budget Cllr Sadler on behalf of the Residents Group and Cllr Fairbank on behalf of the Liberal Democrat group, proposed an amendment that would have required LABGI funds (a one off capital payment) to be used to reduce the overall increase from 4.9% to 3.7%. These funds are a capital increment and form no part of the revenue income for the Borough Council.
How then, in years to come is the Council to fund those services propped up by a one off LABGI payment? The simple answer is that it cannot. There has to be a measure of prudence in a budget delivered at a time of severe economic downturn, where all capital sums must be made to provide as much of a return as possible.
The reality of Elmbridge Borough’s situation is not unique. It will be clear to those eagle-eyed enough to have looked at the trends in London Boroughs to see the dilemma facing all Local Authorities. Hammersmith & Fulham have announced a nil increase in Council Tax. In his frank explanation of such a move the leader of Hammersmith & Fulham, Cllr Stephen Greenhalgh, said they are able to offer the nil increase by virtue of cutting services. Residents of their Borough appear to prefer cuts in frontline services rather than an increase in Council Tax. The same trend appears to permeate across the London Boroughs, with Kensington & Chelsea offering a form of rebate this year. Chairman of London Councils and Cllr in Kensington & Chelsea, Merrick Cockell, has said that such a position will require a radical rethink of the provision of frontline services across London.
So what is the position in Elmbridge? The potential move of the Ember Centre from the Vera Fletcher Hall to another venue cannot properly be categorised as anything other than a review of the service, albeit a radical review. However, this idea resulted in public outcry. If there is outcry when a frontline service is simply reviewed, it seems clear that the residents of Elmbridge have no appetite for cuts in services. The inevitable consequence is that along with all other Councils charged with defending services, there has to be an increase in Council tax at the levels in the recent budget.
What is apparent to all in Local Government is that the problems of the recession, have yet to hit Councils as fully as they will. Cllr Cockell estimates that in his Borough of Kensington & Chelsea they will have to find enormous savings across services to stave off the downturn he expects to see in 3-5 years time.
I am bound to say I think Cllr Cockell is right in his appraisal. Whilst next year will see a similar if slightly less healthy state of affairs, 2011 promises to be a terrible problem for Councils around the Country. Things are likely to get progressively worse over the next 5 years. John Healy MP, Minister for Local Government, was recently quoted as saying he expects ‘austerity’ from all Local Authorities.
With Elmbridge receiving one of the lowest grants in the Country from Central Government (at last calculation 6th lowest) the choice for Council Tax payers is becoming ever more stark. Either expect to pay more and maintain the service we would all like to see maintained, or see Council Tax levied at a lower rate and see frontline services cut.
That is the reality of having a Labour Government intent on centralising power away from Local Councils. As much as they may protest against such increases, Cllrs Sadler and Fairbank would do well to remember that Elmbridge is not immune to the nationwide trends in Local Government, and to do anything other than provide a sensible and prudent budget of the sort Cllr Taylor announced last Wednesday, is to play Russian roulette with the future of our Council and the services it provides.
In opposing such a budget Cllr Sadler on behalf of the Residents Group and Cllr Fairbank on behalf of the Liberal Democrat group, proposed an amendment that would have required LABGI funds (a one off capital payment) to be used to reduce the overall increase from 4.9% to 3.7%. These funds are a capital increment and form no part of the revenue income for the Borough Council.
How then, in years to come is the Council to fund those services propped up by a one off LABGI payment? The simple answer is that it cannot. There has to be a measure of prudence in a budget delivered at a time of severe economic downturn, where all capital sums must be made to provide as much of a return as possible.
The reality of Elmbridge Borough’s situation is not unique. It will be clear to those eagle-eyed enough to have looked at the trends in London Boroughs to see the dilemma facing all Local Authorities. Hammersmith & Fulham have announced a nil increase in Council Tax. In his frank explanation of such a move the leader of Hammersmith & Fulham, Cllr Stephen Greenhalgh, said they are able to offer the nil increase by virtue of cutting services. Residents of their Borough appear to prefer cuts in frontline services rather than an increase in Council Tax. The same trend appears to permeate across the London Boroughs, with Kensington & Chelsea offering a form of rebate this year. Chairman of London Councils and Cllr in Kensington & Chelsea, Merrick Cockell, has said that such a position will require a radical rethink of the provision of frontline services across London.
So what is the position in Elmbridge? The potential move of the Ember Centre from the Vera Fletcher Hall to another venue cannot properly be categorised as anything other than a review of the service, albeit a radical review. However, this idea resulted in public outcry. If there is outcry when a frontline service is simply reviewed, it seems clear that the residents of Elmbridge have no appetite for cuts in services. The inevitable consequence is that along with all other Councils charged with defending services, there has to be an increase in Council tax at the levels in the recent budget.
What is apparent to all in Local Government is that the problems of the recession, have yet to hit Councils as fully as they will. Cllr Cockell estimates that in his Borough of Kensington & Chelsea they will have to find enormous savings across services to stave off the downturn he expects to see in 3-5 years time.
I am bound to say I think Cllr Cockell is right in his appraisal. Whilst next year will see a similar if slightly less healthy state of affairs, 2011 promises to be a terrible problem for Councils around the Country. Things are likely to get progressively worse over the next 5 years. John Healy MP, Minister for Local Government, was recently quoted as saying he expects ‘austerity’ from all Local Authorities.
With Elmbridge receiving one of the lowest grants in the Country from Central Government (at last calculation 6th lowest) the choice for Council Tax payers is becoming ever more stark. Either expect to pay more and maintain the service we would all like to see maintained, or see Council Tax levied at a lower rate and see frontline services cut.
That is the reality of having a Labour Government intent on centralising power away from Local Councils. As much as they may protest against such increases, Cllrs Sadler and Fairbank would do well to remember that Elmbridge is not immune to the nationwide trends in Local Government, and to do anything other than provide a sensible and prudent budget of the sort Cllr Taylor announced last Wednesday, is to play Russian roulette with the future of our Council and the services it provides.
Thursday, 26 February 2009
What is The Borough Council?
The Borough Council is a taxing authority. Some of the aims of the Borough Council can be described as charitable in the broadest sense of the word. All of the aims of the Council are to ensure that people's lives are improved.
The Borough Council is not, however, a Charity in the truest sense of that word. As a Local Authority Elmbridge is not funded by voluntary contributions from a philanthropic group of donors. If it were Elmbridge could justifiably do as it chose with the money given, safe in the knowledge that it had been chosen to distribute it as it saw fit.
The Borough Council as a Taxation authority levies tax. Tax is not a voluntary contribution it is an obligatory requirement to pay money. Therefore the Council owes a duty to ALL Council tax payers, not just those minority groups that shout loudest.
People pay tax and are entitled to expect that money will be used wisely and prudently to better the place in which they live. They do not and should not have to put up with the money being wasted and frittered away on services that no one uses or extra pay for Councillors or the like.
I will continue to defend the rights of all the tax payers of Elmbridge, as well as the vulnerable groups in Elmbridge.
The Borough Council is not, however, a Charity in the truest sense of that word. As a Local Authority Elmbridge is not funded by voluntary contributions from a philanthropic group of donors. If it were Elmbridge could justifiably do as it chose with the money given, safe in the knowledge that it had been chosen to distribute it as it saw fit.
The Borough Council as a Taxation authority levies tax. Tax is not a voluntary contribution it is an obligatory requirement to pay money. Therefore the Council owes a duty to ALL Council tax payers, not just those minority groups that shout loudest.
People pay tax and are entitled to expect that money will be used wisely and prudently to better the place in which they live. They do not and should not have to put up with the money being wasted and frittered away on services that no one uses or extra pay for Councillors or the like.
I will continue to defend the rights of all the tax payers of Elmbridge, as well as the vulnerable groups in Elmbridge.
The Ember Centre - Let's Work Together NOT Against Each Other
Last night the Council passed the budget. Amongst the things in the budget was the question of the future of the Ember Centre.
It was suggested by Cllr Fairbank that the Conservative administration had intended closing it at the beginning of the budgetary process and that what occurred thereafter was the Conservatives climbing down and deciding to relocate the centre, then deciding not to do that either.
It is simply amazing how some people can get lost in their own spin. I can tell Cllr Fairbank and all those who have been the purveyors of such unpleasent rumours that closure was NEVER discussed. Such a disingenuous comment simply causes upset to those who use the Centre and makes their lives all the more stressful, at a time when they have earnt the right to a little peace and enjoyment.
No one is going to close the centre while I am a Member of the Conservative group in charge of Elmbridge.
I would ask all those in The Dittons and Hinchley Wood to remember to take the spin with a pinch of salt. If you have any concerns please contact me. Throughout the period leading up to the budget not a single resident contacted me to discuss the matter. I am here to listen and represent you. I can only do that if you talk to me so please do.
Last night Cllr Mrs. Kapadia was instrumental in presenting a petition to the Council containing a great many signatures. The petition was never discussed with me before the meeting last night, and as all those familiar with any form of Government will know the effective way to get things done is to talk to people.
If both the Lib Dems and the Residents groups were really so concerned about "closure" why not talk to me? I was never asked to sign the petition I was not aware of its existence until last night. At no point were the issues ever ventilated to me with me or through me, in spite of a series of occasions when such a course could have been adopted. I am in the privileged if responsible position of being part of the group running the Council. If those Councillors with whom I share the role of Ward Councillor for Long Ditton don't even have the good grace to speak to me about something they say they are so concerned about how can they possibly hope to influence those in the Conservative group? A latterly presented petition? That is putting petty political points scoring above actually trying to make real change.
Had they spoken to me both Cllr Fairbank and Cllr Kapadia would have been relieved to learn that which they seem intent on denying. The Ember Centre is NOT closing and will NOT close.
It was suggested by Cllr Fairbank that the Conservative administration had intended closing it at the beginning of the budgetary process and that what occurred thereafter was the Conservatives climbing down and deciding to relocate the centre, then deciding not to do that either.
It is simply amazing how some people can get lost in their own spin. I can tell Cllr Fairbank and all those who have been the purveyors of such unpleasent rumours that closure was NEVER discussed. Such a disingenuous comment simply causes upset to those who use the Centre and makes their lives all the more stressful, at a time when they have earnt the right to a little peace and enjoyment.
No one is going to close the centre while I am a Member of the Conservative group in charge of Elmbridge.
I would ask all those in The Dittons and Hinchley Wood to remember to take the spin with a pinch of salt. If you have any concerns please contact me. Throughout the period leading up to the budget not a single resident contacted me to discuss the matter. I am here to listen and represent you. I can only do that if you talk to me so please do.
Last night Cllr Mrs. Kapadia was instrumental in presenting a petition to the Council containing a great many signatures. The petition was never discussed with me before the meeting last night, and as all those familiar with any form of Government will know the effective way to get things done is to talk to people.
If both the Lib Dems and the Residents groups were really so concerned about "closure" why not talk to me? I was never asked to sign the petition I was not aware of its existence until last night. At no point were the issues ever ventilated to me with me or through me, in spite of a series of occasions when such a course could have been adopted. I am in the privileged if responsible position of being part of the group running the Council. If those Councillors with whom I share the role of Ward Councillor for Long Ditton don't even have the good grace to speak to me about something they say they are so concerned about how can they possibly hope to influence those in the Conservative group? A latterly presented petition? That is putting petty political points scoring above actually trying to make real change.
Had they spoken to me both Cllr Fairbank and Cllr Kapadia would have been relieved to learn that which they seem intent on denying. The Ember Centre is NOT closing and will NOT close.
Wednesday, 4 February 2009
Problems Replying to Some Messages
Thank you to those of you who have recently contacted me on the longditton@gmail.com address. For reasons best known to Google some of your messages have been quarantined and I have been unable to retrieve them. My apologies for not replying. If you would like to e-mail me again or try tgrey@elmbridge.gov.uk or leave a message on this blog I will get back to you as soon as possible.
The Ember Centre
As those avid readers of the Esher News & Mail will know I have been quoted in this week's edition in relation to the Ember Centre. Some of the quotes are slightly out of context, though I cannot fault Oliver Florence, as the general tenor of the article is accurate. For the avoidance of any doubt I have copied the full e-mail I sent in response to Mr. Florence's request for my views:
The Ember Centre
I am acutely aware that this is an emotive issue for some of the older residents in the Borough and in particular in the Dittons and Weston Green. I know that the organisers of the centre have expressed reservations about the facilities available at alternative sites.
However, I would be grateful for the opportunity to set one matter right. It is simply inaccurate to say the Ember Centre is closing and leave it at that. I appreciate that is the spin others may seek to put on it, but the reality is that there is no plan to entirely do away with this facility. Rather it is planned to move it to a new home as yet undecided upon, but that takes account of the particular needs of users of the centre. I know it is not the Vera Fletcher Hall that is self-evident, and I know that to some users change may be unwelcome. However, as a Ward Councillor in Long Ditton I am only too pleased to see a sensible and measured approach being taken to updating and reviewing a key service. I believe that not only can the facilities provided elsewhere be equally as good if not better but that we owe a duty to our Council tax payers to ensure we offer the most competitive possible solutions without reducing front line services. In my view that is what this option achieves.
The simple fact is that the Vera Fletcher Hall is too expensive. I know Cllr Sheldon, portfolio holder for Social Affairs, has spent many hours, days and weeks working on the issues and has in my view come to a sensible, sympathetic and well thought out plan that chiefly seeks to meet the needs of older members of our community.
The Ember Centre
I am acutely aware that this is an emotive issue for some of the older residents in the Borough and in particular in the Dittons and Weston Green. I know that the organisers of the centre have expressed reservations about the facilities available at alternative sites.
However, I would be grateful for the opportunity to set one matter right. It is simply inaccurate to say the Ember Centre is closing and leave it at that. I appreciate that is the spin others may seek to put on it, but the reality is that there is no plan to entirely do away with this facility. Rather it is planned to move it to a new home as yet undecided upon, but that takes account of the particular needs of users of the centre. I know it is not the Vera Fletcher Hall that is self-evident, and I know that to some users change may be unwelcome. However, as a Ward Councillor in Long Ditton I am only too pleased to see a sensible and measured approach being taken to updating and reviewing a key service. I believe that not only can the facilities provided elsewhere be equally as good if not better but that we owe a duty to our Council tax payers to ensure we offer the most competitive possible solutions without reducing front line services. In my view that is what this option achieves.
The simple fact is that the Vera Fletcher Hall is too expensive. I know Cllr Sheldon, portfolio holder for Social Affairs, has spent many hours, days and weeks working on the issues and has in my view come to a sensible, sympathetic and well thought out plan that chiefly seeks to meet the needs of older members of our community.
Tuesday, 27 January 2009
Road Signs
Some of you may have noticed the damage that has been caused to the road sign for Ditton Hill Road. I have reported this and it should be replaced over the next few weeks, once a new sign has been manufactured. The sign on the other side of the road is also going to be replaced as it is very old and fading badly.
If you have any other road sign issues please contact me. Below is a guide to the jurisidiction for road signage:
Local Road Names: Elmbridge Borough Council;
Local Road Signage (e.g. speed limits): Surrey County Council;
Signs on Major Roads (e.g. the A3): National Highways Authority.
If in doubt drop me a line through this website or through any of the contact details listed and I will help as best I can.
If you have any other road sign issues please contact me. Below is a guide to the jurisidiction for road signage:
Local Road Names: Elmbridge Borough Council;
Local Road Signage (e.g. speed limits): Surrey County Council;
Signs on Major Roads (e.g. the A3): National Highways Authority.
If in doubt drop me a line through this website or through any of the contact details listed and I will help as best I can.
Tuesday, 6 January 2009
Labour and Lib Dems force through Bin Tax
Just when you thought Gordon Brown couldn't get anymore foolish it appears he has finally done just that. David Cameron remarked this week that sometimes "he could just shake Gordon Brown" for the complete ineptitude with which he is behaving. David was referring to Mr. Brown's VAT cut and lack of any strategy to help pensioners and those with savings at the lower end of the earnings scale.
David's view is borne out in another area in light of the way in which the government has forced through plans to employ bin taxes in "pilot councils around the Country." As yet no Councils have volunteered to be guinea pigs.
However, that doesn't matter when one reads the small print of the Bill. The government can by order make Councils introduce the new tax and thereby not go through Parliament to introduce this iniquitous and unfair charge. It is particularly ironic that Mr. Brown should have behaved in this way when he had attempted to intervene to scrap the tax and grab the headlines and Daily Mail plaudits, before the local government elections in May last year.
It appears the Prime Minister's ability to perform U-turn after U-turn is second to none. Now that the local elections have been and gone, resulting in dismal failure for Labour, and with the Government facing economic meltdown, he has changed his tune once again.
Official technical documents reveal that the bin taxes will take one of four forms:
• Bin bag tax: Households must pay for special bin bags. Rubbish not placed in a paid-for bag will not be collected.
• Bin size tax: Households will be charged for the size of their bin; with families requiring a bigger bin paying the most.
• Weekly collection tax: Households needing a weekly rubbish collection will pay an extra charge.
• Bin chip tax: Households will receive a bill based on the weight of the contents of their bin, with microchips in the bin feeding through to a central billing database.
This will, on the government's own analysis, increase fly-tipping by up to 155,000 more tonnes of rubbish per year. Even more ridiculous is the situation that will arise when households are paying for rubbish collection by amount, and the local refuse tips remain free. We will all be in a position where we are forced, in straitened economic times, to burn fuel and drive to our local tip rather than pay the premium to have our rubbish collected.
Perhaps most shocking is the stance that the supposed champions of Green politics have taken in the whole issue. The LibDems are very fond of telling us how much they recycle, how committed they are to the environment, and how they are the greenest party of them all. Lest we forget that it is the LibDem Kingston Council that refuses to let Long Ditton residents use the Villiers Road waste disposal site. However, as if sending us on a 10 mile round trip to Leatherhead wasn't enough, the LibDems have now backed the government's plan to introduce the new bin tax. It simply beggars belief!
“With Liberal Democrats supporting Labour’s plans for these new taxes, only Conservatives are standing up for over-taxed, hard-working families struggling to get by.”
Eric Pickles MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Local Government.
The Countryside Alliance, has told Ministers that "fly-tipping is already at epidemic levels"; bin taxes will mean more "fly-tipping, back-garden burning and other types of illegal waste disposal", and "larger families and poorer families will be detrimentally hit".
"I fear that families with modest incomes, the elderly and vulnerable will be hit the hardest...Labour's bin tax plans, which could cost families up to £120 a year will only increase the amount of illegally dumped rubbish in our precious countryside, towns and villages." Stephen O'Brien MP, Shadow Minister for Health.
It is clear that the government are intent on forcing local councils into imposing bin taxes on all parts of the community. This is inherently unfair on us all. With some Councils already being forced to consider the tax as a way of making ends meet, given the extremely low levels of central government funding, it appears to be a question whether we can hold out until they force it upon us or whether we succumb to the inevitable need to keep Councils afloat.
This unconscionable bullying of citizens is symptomatic of the "big brother" attitude emanating from all levels of Labour policy making. It is a sad day indeed when we see the LibDems advocating the self-same thing.
We must stop this in whatever way we can. Please voice your views either through this site or write to us c/o David Loader at the address above or to tgrey@elmbridge.gov.uk.
For related links see: http://www.conservatives.com/News/News_stories/2008/09/We_will_deliver_weekly_rubbish_collections.aspx
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1103855/The-Great-Bin-Tax-Rebellion-Councils-refuse-impose-pay-throw-charge-families-hit-credit-crunch.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7809060.stm
http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2007/10/gordos-invisiblhtml/
David's view is borne out in another area in light of the way in which the government has forced through plans to employ bin taxes in "pilot councils around the Country." As yet no Councils have volunteered to be guinea pigs.
However, that doesn't matter when one reads the small print of the Bill. The government can by order make Councils introduce the new tax and thereby not go through Parliament to introduce this iniquitous and unfair charge. It is particularly ironic that Mr. Brown should have behaved in this way when he had attempted to intervene to scrap the tax and grab the headlines and Daily Mail plaudits, before the local government elections in May last year.
It appears the Prime Minister's ability to perform U-turn after U-turn is second to none. Now that the local elections have been and gone, resulting in dismal failure for Labour, and with the Government facing economic meltdown, he has changed his tune once again.
Official technical documents reveal that the bin taxes will take one of four forms:
• Bin bag tax: Households must pay for special bin bags. Rubbish not placed in a paid-for bag will not be collected.
• Bin size tax: Households will be charged for the size of their bin; with families requiring a bigger bin paying the most.
• Weekly collection tax: Households needing a weekly rubbish collection will pay an extra charge.
• Bin chip tax: Households will receive a bill based on the weight of the contents of their bin, with microchips in the bin feeding through to a central billing database.
This will, on the government's own analysis, increase fly-tipping by up to 155,000 more tonnes of rubbish per year. Even more ridiculous is the situation that will arise when households are paying for rubbish collection by amount, and the local refuse tips remain free. We will all be in a position where we are forced, in straitened economic times, to burn fuel and drive to our local tip rather than pay the premium to have our rubbish collected.
Perhaps most shocking is the stance that the supposed champions of Green politics have taken in the whole issue. The LibDems are very fond of telling us how much they recycle, how committed they are to the environment, and how they are the greenest party of them all. Lest we forget that it is the LibDem Kingston Council that refuses to let Long Ditton residents use the Villiers Road waste disposal site. However, as if sending us on a 10 mile round trip to Leatherhead wasn't enough, the LibDems have now backed the government's plan to introduce the new bin tax. It simply beggars belief!
“With Liberal Democrats supporting Labour’s plans for these new taxes, only Conservatives are standing up for over-taxed, hard-working families struggling to get by.”
Eric Pickles MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Local Government.
The Countryside Alliance, has told Ministers that "fly-tipping is already at epidemic levels"; bin taxes will mean more "fly-tipping, back-garden burning and other types of illegal waste disposal", and "larger families and poorer families will be detrimentally hit".
"I fear that families with modest incomes, the elderly and vulnerable will be hit the hardest...Labour's bin tax plans, which could cost families up to £120 a year will only increase the amount of illegally dumped rubbish in our precious countryside, towns and villages." Stephen O'Brien MP, Shadow Minister for Health.
It is clear that the government are intent on forcing local councils into imposing bin taxes on all parts of the community. This is inherently unfair on us all. With some Councils already being forced to consider the tax as a way of making ends meet, given the extremely low levels of central government funding, it appears to be a question whether we can hold out until they force it upon us or whether we succumb to the inevitable need to keep Councils afloat.
This unconscionable bullying of citizens is symptomatic of the "big brother" attitude emanating from all levels of Labour policy making. It is a sad day indeed when we see the LibDems advocating the self-same thing.
We must stop this in whatever way we can. Please voice your views either through this site or write to us c/o David Loader at the address above or to tgrey@elmbridge.gov.uk.
For related links see: http://www.conservatives.com/News/News_stories/2008/09/We_will_deliver_weekly_rubbish_collections.aspx
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1103855/The-Great-Bin-Tax-Rebellion-Councils-refuse-impose-pay-throw-charge-families-hit-credit-crunch.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7809060.stm
http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2007/10/gordos-invisiblhtml/
Friday, 19 December 2008
The Jolly Boatman Site: Hampton Court
It has dominated Elmbridge Planning for years, and finally the Jolly Boatman site has been decided upon. Last night the full Elmbridge Council voted to agree the planning proposal 2008/1600, including a hotel, flats, shops a rennovated station and the Royal Star & Garter home on the derelict site around Hampton Court Station.
For those unfamiliar with the application it is fair to say it generated an enormous amount of passionate objection and passionate support. It was an extremely difficult decision to make and those in the Council agonized long and hard over it. I was no exception. The doubts I had were enough for me to abstain from voting as I felt unable to agree with every element of the scheme and its design. I wish I had been able to vote for it, but ultimately I felt unable to do so when applying the very strict criteria relating to planning applications.
It may sound odd but I am nevertheless delighted that the application has been granted. Whilst I could not support it in strict planning terms there is no doubt in my mind that it is both a valuable and worthwhile scheme to the people of Hampton Court and East Molesey, as well as the rest of Elmbridge.
In Long Ditton we will doubtless benefit from the enhancement to a nearby community, the regeneration of the most visited area of Elmbridge, which has for many years been an embarrassment, additional shops to assist a local community suffering as we all are, from the ill effects of recession, and perhaps most proudly of all, we can play host to the Royal Star & Garter home for disabled ex-servicemen and women.
To play host to the Royal Star & Garter home is one of the greatest honours that our Borough can hope for. Even those vociferous in their objections were quick to acknowledge that this was not only a worthy cause but a noble and proud duty we, as a Borough ought to be delighted to perform.
I acknowledged in my abstention the negative elements of this development. I acknowledge those widely held concerns put forward by objectors. However, this is our generation's chance to leave a truly positive and worthwhile legacy in an area of historic importance.
To those of you disappointed by the decision can I therefore invite you to look at the positive aspects and give them the weight and primacy they deserve.
If nothing else we have, in the short term given a shot in the arm to a local economy, visibly improved our community, and improved the facilities of an important station. In the long term we have secured the future of the Royal Star & Garter, whose economic viability was in doubt in their current home on Richmond Hill, we have secured the financial viability of the open area of Cigarette Island, and we have made sure our community is, in the round, improved.
I look forward with enthusiasm to the future of the Jolly Boatman site, and I hope we can now move on from the acrimony this application has generated.
For those unfamiliar with the application it is fair to say it generated an enormous amount of passionate objection and passionate support. It was an extremely difficult decision to make and those in the Council agonized long and hard over it. I was no exception. The doubts I had were enough for me to abstain from voting as I felt unable to agree with every element of the scheme and its design. I wish I had been able to vote for it, but ultimately I felt unable to do so when applying the very strict criteria relating to planning applications.
It may sound odd but I am nevertheless delighted that the application has been granted. Whilst I could not support it in strict planning terms there is no doubt in my mind that it is both a valuable and worthwhile scheme to the people of Hampton Court and East Molesey, as well as the rest of Elmbridge.
In Long Ditton we will doubtless benefit from the enhancement to a nearby community, the regeneration of the most visited area of Elmbridge, which has for many years been an embarrassment, additional shops to assist a local community suffering as we all are, from the ill effects of recession, and perhaps most proudly of all, we can play host to the Royal Star & Garter home for disabled ex-servicemen and women.
To play host to the Royal Star & Garter home is one of the greatest honours that our Borough can hope for. Even those vociferous in their objections were quick to acknowledge that this was not only a worthy cause but a noble and proud duty we, as a Borough ought to be delighted to perform.
I acknowledged in my abstention the negative elements of this development. I acknowledge those widely held concerns put forward by objectors. However, this is our generation's chance to leave a truly positive and worthwhile legacy in an area of historic importance.
To those of you disappointed by the decision can I therefore invite you to look at the positive aspects and give them the weight and primacy they deserve.
If nothing else we have, in the short term given a shot in the arm to a local economy, visibly improved our community, and improved the facilities of an important station. In the long term we have secured the future of the Royal Star & Garter, whose economic viability was in doubt in their current home on Richmond Hill, we have secured the financial viability of the open area of Cigarette Island, and we have made sure our community is, in the round, improved.
I look forward with enthusiasm to the future of the Jolly Boatman site, and I hope we can now move on from the acrimony this application has generated.
Friday, 5 December 2008
Councillors Allowances: Why I Voted Against an Increase
On Wednesday night Elmbidge Council debated the question of Councillors remuneration. In particular we debated a proposal by an independent remuneration panel to increase Councillors' pay by 3%. The Conservative administration put forward the recommendation, based on expert reports and before the full impact of the recession had been understood.
In spite of the fact this was a Conservative proposal, I found myself unable to support the recommendation, along with all bar 7 of my Conservative colleagues. The reason is simple.
Elmbridge faces a very tough time. The budget must balance and in the current economic climate that is becoming increasingly difficult to achieve. Things will be difficult. Belts will need to be tightened. I could not, in all good conscience watch as we have to make those tough decisions, after being in the position of voting myself a pay rise.
The pay rise itself was not massive, and in real terms for someone on the backbenches such as me, it would have meant roughly £150 a year. This is not going to be enough to plug the gap in the Elmbridge budget. However, that £150 could go towards funding something else. Like most Councillors I don't do this for the money, I am not going to leave and go to a more competitive Council! This is where I live and I do this job to help my Community. I didn't know, until after my election, that I even received an allowance!
I like everyone else at the moment, am grateful for every penny. It enables me to do the best I can for Elmbridge and for Long Ditton. However, that includes being true to the declaration I signed, to do the best for our community. I strongly believe that refusing the increase was the best decision for that community.
My thanks go to all those in the Conservative group who voted with me, whilst my apologies go to the leadership of the group for being unable to support them on this occasion.
In spite of the fact this was a Conservative proposal, I found myself unable to support the recommendation, along with all bar 7 of my Conservative colleagues. The reason is simple.
Elmbridge faces a very tough time. The budget must balance and in the current economic climate that is becoming increasingly difficult to achieve. Things will be difficult. Belts will need to be tightened. I could not, in all good conscience watch as we have to make those tough decisions, after being in the position of voting myself a pay rise.
The pay rise itself was not massive, and in real terms for someone on the backbenches such as me, it would have meant roughly £150 a year. This is not going to be enough to plug the gap in the Elmbridge budget. However, that £150 could go towards funding something else. Like most Councillors I don't do this for the money, I am not going to leave and go to a more competitive Council! This is where I live and I do this job to help my Community. I didn't know, until after my election, that I even received an allowance!
I like everyone else at the moment, am grateful for every penny. It enables me to do the best I can for Elmbridge and for Long Ditton. However, that includes being true to the declaration I signed, to do the best for our community. I strongly believe that refusing the increase was the best decision for that community.
My thanks go to all those in the Conservative group who voted with me, whilst my apologies go to the leadership of the group for being unable to support them on this occasion.
Tuesday, 18 November 2008
A Feeling of Real Change
On Remembrance Sunday I attended the Long Ditton War memorial for a very moving ceremony, as I have said below. For me there was an added, and some might think slightly parochial feeling of achivement.
As a new Councillor I had been told that things take an extremely long time in local politics. Things don't change much, and there is very little real power. Whilst some of those observations may be true, I was delighted to see that I had made a real difference to several senior former servicemen.
Up until a week before the ceremony, the bench by the memorial was in a state of disrepair. It was unsafe to sit on with struts missing and so on. I got on to the Leisure and Services division at Elmbridge and made sure the bench was replaced with a new one in time for November 9th.
I know it's only a small thing and perhaps I am getting over-excited unnecessarily, but to me it was a very real manifestation of the fact that I can have an effect, that I can make our community a better place to be.
Many of you will doubtless be reading this and commenting that this is really a very small achievement. I agree there is much more to do. However, it symbolises to me the change that we have already made and that we can together make Long Ditton an even better place to be.
As a new Councillor I had been told that things take an extremely long time in local politics. Things don't change much, and there is very little real power. Whilst some of those observations may be true, I was delighted to see that I had made a real difference to several senior former servicemen.
Up until a week before the ceremony, the bench by the memorial was in a state of disrepair. It was unsafe to sit on with struts missing and so on. I got on to the Leisure and Services division at Elmbridge and made sure the bench was replaced with a new one in time for November 9th.
I know it's only a small thing and perhaps I am getting over-excited unnecessarily, but to me it was a very real manifestation of the fact that I can have an effect, that I can make our community a better place to be.
Many of you will doubtless be reading this and commenting that this is really a very small achievement. I agree there is much more to do. However, it symbolises to me the change that we have already made and that we can together make Long Ditton an even better place to be.
Wednesday, 12 November 2008
Remembrance Sunday
It was my privilege and pleasure to represent Ian Taylor MBE, MP at last weekend's Remembrance Sunday events. I was lucky enough to attend not only the War Memorial ceremony but also the service immediately afterwards in the British Legion.
Both services were tremendously moving, and made me extremely proud of Long Ditton, and the tremendous bravery shown by those men and women who have fought for our Nation and our Freedom.
Both services were tremendously moving, and made me extremely proud of Long Ditton, and the tremendous bravery shown by those men and women who have fought for our Nation and our Freedom.
The Thames Ditton & Weston Green Residents Association
When I was elected to the Elmbridge Borough Council six months ago, I was pleased and delighted to be part of a body that really cared about the community it served. I remain delighted to be a Councillor in company with a great many who demonstrate on a daily basis that no matter what the party, the reason for being in local government is to put the needs and requirements of the community you serve in the forefront of all your thinking.
I was pleased by the idea that there was no great political posturing by the party groups on the Council. Such was my understanding. Certainly the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats and some in the Residents group are able to debate and discuss those issues that are so important to us all in a sensible and level-headed manner, aware that we live and work in a democracy. We might not always agree with each other and sometimes I find myself in the minority and have to deal with losing the argument.
Such is the way in a true democracy, and quite rightly so. If I am not in the majority I understand that my personal view must rightly be subjugated to the view of the majority. That is what being true to democracy is all about.
Naively I believed the third party grouping when I joined Elmbridge and, honestly believed that the Residents Association was not a political party. They had told me through their newsletter and websites that they were not. Therefore I thought they must be genuine in such a sentiment.
The "Political" Residents
The steep learning curve I have mentioned previously in posts has continued unabated. The newest and most troubling thing I have learnt is that the Residents Association group is the most political organisation on Elmbridge Borough Council. They campaign and spin in a manner I had not thought likely, nor particularly desirable in local politics.
Sandown Park
It appears clear from their most recent efforts that I have dared to hold a view contrary to their view, and that as such I ought to be harangued as a figure akin to John Prescott. I refer to the recent decision made in the East Area planning sub-committee about Sandown Park. After considerable thought, a lengthy site visit and a considerable amount of time considering the relevant Elmbridge guidelines, I decided to speak at the meeting relating to the proposal and to make some points I felt were important.
In making my points I felt that the entirely reasonable objections made to the application were in fact not views I agreed with. I made my decision based on equally reasonable views that happened to differ from those of others. I make no apology for that. That surely is democracy? Encumbent upon anyone sitting on a planning committee is a duty to go to a meeting with an open mind, to hear all sides of the debate and only then to make up one's mind finally. This I did.
The issues were finely balanced. Cllr Mrs. Shipley of the Thames Ditton Residents made some extremely persuasive points. However, ultimately I had to come to my own decision. I did so having heard views from others, both for and against. I did so well aware of how finely balanced the issues were of exactly what test I had to be satisifed of and well aware of my responsibilities. My decision was taken after considerable mental and intellectual analysis. It was not a whim and not a swift or easy decision. In voting as I did I happened to find myself in the majority.
The residents representatives from Thames Ditton & Weston Green all voted in the same way and were in the minority.
I am not going to go into the issues here, as I am aware that the process has gone to the full Planning Committee and they will meet to decide the issue in due course. I have no doubt they will consider things in the same careful and sensible manner as we did. If their views differ from mine I shall not go to the press and shout about how ridiculous they are. I shall show a level of respect for their views on matters of planning policy that are, it seems to me very finely balanced, and will of course respect the decision.
Spin, Political Manoeuvring & Off to the Press
I was therefore astounded to learn that the "non-political" residents association had opted to go to the press when they hadn't got their way in the East Area Planning Sub-Committee. With claims as wild as Conservatives block-voting by some sort of agreement, and me being someone who wants to treat the green belt in the same manner as John Prescott.
This is simple rubbish. It is political posturing of the worst kind. The Conservative grouping on the Council may not be to the tastes of Cllr Mrs. Lyon and her comrades in the Thames Ditton and Weston Green Residents Association, but we do not have group meetings carefully timed to coincide with planning committees at which we review planning matters.
We are busy trying to make Elmbridge as good for our community as we can. I have never been told how to vote or what opinion to hold by anyone in the Conservative group, and I can assure anyone who was thinking of telling me what my view is that it wouldn't work. That is as true in Planning as in any other area of Council business.
Democracy does not include the Right to Bully
I live in the oldest democracy in the World and I am extremely proud of that fact. I will stand up for the rights of anyone to hold their own views, and do not take kindly to having mine pilloried in the local press simply because a very particular interest group doesn't like it.
I hear an awful lot of views I don't like or agree with, that does not mean I lampoon or degrade those who hold them or their right to hold such views. I don't ask others to agree with me, I do ask for common respect for my views, nevertheless.
We Are Extremely Lucky in Long Ditton
I can only consider that in Long Ditton we are extremely lucky to have a Residents Association that is truly independent of politics and truly acting as a pressure group with only the interests of the community as an agenda.
My Reasons for My Decision
I perhaps need not say that as with every decision I have had to make, the Sandown Park decision was one I truly believe to have been in the best interests of Esher, the area around Esher of which we in Long Ditton are a crucial part, the Green Belt, and of course Elmbridge as a whole. I will not be cowed by political tricks into agreeing with others simply because not to do so is going to lead to them spinning some story based on half-truths, supposition and poorly justified semantics.
In spite of malicious rumours to the contrary both Ian Taylor, our MP and I, are in total agreement on the way in which the Green Belt should be protected. I have spoken to Ian on occasions about this very subject, and know how committed we are as a party to protecting Elmbridge, and Surrey in general, from over-development.
I was pleased by the idea that there was no great political posturing by the party groups on the Council. Such was my understanding. Certainly the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats and some in the Residents group are able to debate and discuss those issues that are so important to us all in a sensible and level-headed manner, aware that we live and work in a democracy. We might not always agree with each other and sometimes I find myself in the minority and have to deal with losing the argument.
Such is the way in a true democracy, and quite rightly so. If I am not in the majority I understand that my personal view must rightly be subjugated to the view of the majority. That is what being true to democracy is all about.
Naively I believed the third party grouping when I joined Elmbridge and, honestly believed that the Residents Association was not a political party. They had told me through their newsletter and websites that they were not. Therefore I thought they must be genuine in such a sentiment.
The "Political" Residents
The steep learning curve I have mentioned previously in posts has continued unabated. The newest and most troubling thing I have learnt is that the Residents Association group is the most political organisation on Elmbridge Borough Council. They campaign and spin in a manner I had not thought likely, nor particularly desirable in local politics.
Sandown Park
It appears clear from their most recent efforts that I have dared to hold a view contrary to their view, and that as such I ought to be harangued as a figure akin to John Prescott. I refer to the recent decision made in the East Area planning sub-committee about Sandown Park. After considerable thought, a lengthy site visit and a considerable amount of time considering the relevant Elmbridge guidelines, I decided to speak at the meeting relating to the proposal and to make some points I felt were important.
In making my points I felt that the entirely reasonable objections made to the application were in fact not views I agreed with. I made my decision based on equally reasonable views that happened to differ from those of others. I make no apology for that. That surely is democracy? Encumbent upon anyone sitting on a planning committee is a duty to go to a meeting with an open mind, to hear all sides of the debate and only then to make up one's mind finally. This I did.
The issues were finely balanced. Cllr Mrs. Shipley of the Thames Ditton Residents made some extremely persuasive points. However, ultimately I had to come to my own decision. I did so having heard views from others, both for and against. I did so well aware of how finely balanced the issues were of exactly what test I had to be satisifed of and well aware of my responsibilities. My decision was taken after considerable mental and intellectual analysis. It was not a whim and not a swift or easy decision. In voting as I did I happened to find myself in the majority.
The residents representatives from Thames Ditton & Weston Green all voted in the same way and were in the minority.
I am not going to go into the issues here, as I am aware that the process has gone to the full Planning Committee and they will meet to decide the issue in due course. I have no doubt they will consider things in the same careful and sensible manner as we did. If their views differ from mine I shall not go to the press and shout about how ridiculous they are. I shall show a level of respect for their views on matters of planning policy that are, it seems to me very finely balanced, and will of course respect the decision.
Spin, Political Manoeuvring & Off to the Press
I was therefore astounded to learn that the "non-political" residents association had opted to go to the press when they hadn't got their way in the East Area Planning Sub-Committee. With claims as wild as Conservatives block-voting by some sort of agreement, and me being someone who wants to treat the green belt in the same manner as John Prescott.
This is simple rubbish. It is political posturing of the worst kind. The Conservative grouping on the Council may not be to the tastes of Cllr Mrs. Lyon and her comrades in the Thames Ditton and Weston Green Residents Association, but we do not have group meetings carefully timed to coincide with planning committees at which we review planning matters.
We are busy trying to make Elmbridge as good for our community as we can. I have never been told how to vote or what opinion to hold by anyone in the Conservative group, and I can assure anyone who was thinking of telling me what my view is that it wouldn't work. That is as true in Planning as in any other area of Council business.
Democracy does not include the Right to Bully
I live in the oldest democracy in the World and I am extremely proud of that fact. I will stand up for the rights of anyone to hold their own views, and do not take kindly to having mine pilloried in the local press simply because a very particular interest group doesn't like it.
I hear an awful lot of views I don't like or agree with, that does not mean I lampoon or degrade those who hold them or their right to hold such views. I don't ask others to agree with me, I do ask for common respect for my views, nevertheless.
We Are Extremely Lucky in Long Ditton
I can only consider that in Long Ditton we are extremely lucky to have a Residents Association that is truly independent of politics and truly acting as a pressure group with only the interests of the community as an agenda.
My Reasons for My Decision
I perhaps need not say that as with every decision I have had to make, the Sandown Park decision was one I truly believe to have been in the best interests of Esher, the area around Esher of which we in Long Ditton are a crucial part, the Green Belt, and of course Elmbridge as a whole. I will not be cowed by political tricks into agreeing with others simply because not to do so is going to lead to them spinning some story based on half-truths, supposition and poorly justified semantics.
In spite of malicious rumours to the contrary both Ian Taylor, our MP and I, are in total agreement on the way in which the Green Belt should be protected. I have spoken to Ian on occasions about this very subject, and know how committed we are as a party to protecting Elmbridge, and Surrey in general, from over-development.
Friday, 19 September 2008
With the Summer break now at an end, I though it was about time to update you on the latest developments. As you can imagine things go somewhat more slowly over the summer with people being away, but below is a round-up of what I have been doing over the period.
The Honda Development on Portsmouth Road
A number of people have been in touch about the new development on the Honda Site on Portsmouth Road and the corner of Winters Road. As a result of the concerns raised I have looked into the granting of planning permission. It appears permission was granted in 2006, and that there were no objections submitted by consultees. On the question of consultees, Elmbridge complied with their duties to notify local residents of the application.
As one, understandably upset, resident put it "we appear to be in a situation of trying to close the stable door after the horse has bolted". With respect I agree entirely. Unfortunately there is nothing that can be done once permission is granted. Why permission was granted in the first place appears to me somewhat unclear, however, should such a development come before the Committee now I will do all I can to resist it.
What I have ensured is that if we can't stop it then at least it is within the bounds of the permission that has been granted. Having spoken to the Planning department, an inspector visited the site to ensure that the building complied with the permission. Scant consolation though it may be, the building so far does comply with the permission as granted. However, I would ask all residents in the area to remain vigilant and let me or the Planning department at Elmbridge know of any issues that arise, including any issues over on-street parking of site traffic in the area.
Equally I know that concerns have been raised over other construction in the area. In relation to all these matters things are in hand to resolve any potential breaches of planning regulation.
Parking In Southbank Car Park
As many of you may be aware Elmbridge commissioned an independent body to look at the issues of car parks in the Borough. Their report made various recommendations concentrating to a large extent on areas other than Long Ditton. In relation to Long Ditton it recommended a look at the viability of Southbank car park. As a result of significant concerns throughout the Council, not least from all those representing Long Ditton, a Task Group was set up to take soundings from Councillors about the report's conclusions.
Cross-Party Co-operation
I am pleased to say the issue of Southbank presented the first opportunity for all three of the Long Ditton councillors to work together, myself, Cllr Mrs. Kapadia and Cllr Fairbank. In an effort to ensure that Long Ditton gets the best results possible they both agreed to contribute to a joint document I submitted to the Task Group about the future of Southbank. Along with the efforts of County Councillor Peter Hickman we have made the case for the retaining of Southbank for the future, and I am hopeful that it will be well-heeded by those deciding the issue.
Wentworth Close and Church Meadow
At last there is some progress for the long suffering residents of Wentworth Close. As I mentioned in a previous blog I had highlighted the issue to the roads department at Surrey. I am pleased to say that the worst of the problems in Wentworth Close as well as the pot-holes in Church Meadow are due to be dealt with in the next few weeks. I appreciate this is only a short term solution, particularly for Wentworth Close, but at least we know Surrey hasn't forgotten about us completely.
Let's Meet
As ever getting your views and thoughts on all matters to do with our community is of paramount importance to my effectiveness as your representative. Please get in touch with any issues you may have.
I will be knocking on as many doors as possible over the next few months to see if there any issues or concerns with which I can assist. I am conscious that the last time you saw me I was asking for your vote. This time I will only be asking how I can help, so please let me know.
National Politics
With Party Conference season in full swing, I have no doubt many people are already getting tired with the political soundbites. I will do everything I can not to add to them and will continue to get on with the job you have given me.
Nevertheless, if you have any views about any of the issues relating to national politics I am keen to hear them, although I can't promise to agree! So please get in touch.
The Honda Development on Portsmouth Road
A number of people have been in touch about the new development on the Honda Site on Portsmouth Road and the corner of Winters Road. As a result of the concerns raised I have looked into the granting of planning permission. It appears permission was granted in 2006, and that there were no objections submitted by consultees. On the question of consultees, Elmbridge complied with their duties to notify local residents of the application.
As one, understandably upset, resident put it "we appear to be in a situation of trying to close the stable door after the horse has bolted". With respect I agree entirely. Unfortunately there is nothing that can be done once permission is granted. Why permission was granted in the first place appears to me somewhat unclear, however, should such a development come before the Committee now I will do all I can to resist it.
What I have ensured is that if we can't stop it then at least it is within the bounds of the permission that has been granted. Having spoken to the Planning department, an inspector visited the site to ensure that the building complied with the permission. Scant consolation though it may be, the building so far does comply with the permission as granted. However, I would ask all residents in the area to remain vigilant and let me or the Planning department at Elmbridge know of any issues that arise, including any issues over on-street parking of site traffic in the area.
Equally I know that concerns have been raised over other construction in the area. In relation to all these matters things are in hand to resolve any potential breaches of planning regulation.
Parking In Southbank Car Park
As many of you may be aware Elmbridge commissioned an independent body to look at the issues of car parks in the Borough. Their report made various recommendations concentrating to a large extent on areas other than Long Ditton. In relation to Long Ditton it recommended a look at the viability of Southbank car park. As a result of significant concerns throughout the Council, not least from all those representing Long Ditton, a Task Group was set up to take soundings from Councillors about the report's conclusions.
Cross-Party Co-operation
I am pleased to say the issue of Southbank presented the first opportunity for all three of the Long Ditton councillors to work together, myself, Cllr Mrs. Kapadia and Cllr Fairbank. In an effort to ensure that Long Ditton gets the best results possible they both agreed to contribute to a joint document I submitted to the Task Group about the future of Southbank. Along with the efforts of County Councillor Peter Hickman we have made the case for the retaining of Southbank for the future, and I am hopeful that it will be well-heeded by those deciding the issue.
Wentworth Close and Church Meadow
At last there is some progress for the long suffering residents of Wentworth Close. As I mentioned in a previous blog I had highlighted the issue to the roads department at Surrey. I am pleased to say that the worst of the problems in Wentworth Close as well as the pot-holes in Church Meadow are due to be dealt with in the next few weeks. I appreciate this is only a short term solution, particularly for Wentworth Close, but at least we know Surrey hasn't forgotten about us completely.
Let's Meet
As ever getting your views and thoughts on all matters to do with our community is of paramount importance to my effectiveness as your representative. Please get in touch with any issues you may have.
I will be knocking on as many doors as possible over the next few months to see if there any issues or concerns with which I can assist. I am conscious that the last time you saw me I was asking for your vote. This time I will only be asking how I can help, so please let me know.
National Politics
With Party Conference season in full swing, I have no doubt many people are already getting tired with the political soundbites. I will do everything I can not to add to them and will continue to get on with the job you have given me.
Nevertheless, if you have any views about any of the issues relating to national politics I am keen to hear them, although I can't promise to agree! So please get in touch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
