Three Conservative councillors have now been suspended from Bracknell Forest Council's Conservative group because they voted against the housing plans in November. Eight Conservative councillors in total voted against these plans, however the other 5 has not been suspended because the houses would be in the words they represent.
These councillors are Chas Baily, Hanworth, Michael Sargeant,Bullbrook and Shelagh Pile, Harmans Water,This was because even though there are 40 Tories on a council of 42 members the conservative leadership still felt it necessary impose a three-line whip.
At least these councillors voted for what they believed their electorate wanted. Yet another example of why it's so important to have some opposition members from other parties on this council.
Our Bracknell MP has written in the Bracknell Standard to inform them that he welcomes plans to increase the number of carriages on train services in and out of London Paddington from Reading. Adding that "This is great news for rail passengers in the Bracknell constituency." Actually it's not great news for Bracknell at all.
Thing is the Bracknell line is from Reading to Waterloo not Paddington. It won't make any difference because users in Reading don't use this line for speed (Paddington line is much faster) but because they need to go to Waterloo. The line from Maidenhead where the Bracknell MP lives will have longer carriages however.
The biggest problems in Bracknell are frequency of trains to London (every half an hour) when more are required at both ends of rush hour. And the speed of them because it take an hour to get to London as there are no fast trains offered.
If Phillip Lee used the line from Bracknell rather than Maidenhead (where the Bracknell MP lives and which will have longer carriages) and read the detail of the train proposals perhaps he would realise how little effect this will have on our town as it won't provide an economic benefit to Bracknell directly only act to further demonstrate how Bracknell is missing out.
This weeks Bracknell Standard question was "Councils now have the opportunity to return to weekly bin collections after the Government put aside £250 million to help councils go back to the weekly system but councils must sign up for a minimum of five years to receive the money. In Bracknell, council leader Councillor Paul Bettison has not ruled out the possibility but fears it may lead to spiralling costs.
"Would you like to see a return to weekly bin collections, or do you feel the fortnightly collections are okay? The council says statistics show people may not be able to organise themselves for weekly bin collections, do you agree with this?"
And my reply;
I believe my own local party (Lib Dems) support the idea of a weekly bin collection. However I'm not as keen. I understand that this is a very emotive issue, I myself fall on the bi-Weekly bin collections side of the argument. I don't think its right that the coalition have found £250 million to spend on bins when this could be better spend on many other things should as elderly care or children's services or social housing.
Some people also don't believe in recycling and this is a way of forcing them to use it as you need to use that second blue bin thereby ensuring that recycling is done.
Then again I don't get so upset about the bin issue as others, I think there are many far more important things to worry about. After all if we only have the bins to worry about then life can't be that bad, can it?
Please do support South Hill Park arts centre which is losing its grant from the Art Council due to the government cuts. From £216,745 for 2011/12, to £100,000 for 2012/2013 and zero from 2014. see save_south_hill_park_say_protesters
This funding helps to pay for events such as the Big Day Out festival, it also helps funds those parts of the arts that do not bring in large amounts of funds to the arts centre.
Hopefully this cut won't mean the loss of our arts centre, however I'm sure it will lead to a loss in some of the arts or an increase in ticket prices. I guess we will soon find out.
Firstly, I'd like to thank Daz for allowing me to make a guest post on the Bracknell Blog. I don't run a blog myself, and I admire the effort and commitment it takes to keep a blog current as Daz and many others do, so having the opportunity to reach a wider audience through his hard work is very much appreciated.
Right, on to the story at hand. Regular readers might remember me – I'm the amateur film maker/thorn in the side of the elected, who stood in the general election against MP's abusing their expenses, and in particular, our ex local MP who helped himself in royal style. I've been concentrating on work since then, but something recently caught my eye, so I had to investigate.
Visitors to Bracknell town centre might be delighted to note the new mural that has been painted on the subway between the town centre and Bracknell and Wokingham College. Much like a visit to Sea World in Florida but without leaving Blighty, residents can enjoy an 'undersea tunnel' of fish, turtles, sharks and rays as they make their way through to the shopping area, and I'm sure the children in our community enjoy it greatly. What follows calls into question the wisdom of this work, but I want to be clear from the start – I have no objection at all with making our environment a nice place to be – if we have the funds of course.
One thing puzzled me, though – when cuts are being made to social care for the elderly, teaching places for local schools, social support for the vulnerable and many other services that I think most compassionate residents would consider 'essential', is it right that we're spending big money painting subways with such elaborate paint schemes? So, inevitably, a Freedom of Information request was submitted, to understand what the cost to the taxpayer was. Here's the initial response: FoI1 LINK
From my observations, it took the company performing the painting about 4 weeks to complete the job, and there were between two and four decorators working at any one time. I calculated that if it took four people four weeks, and they were paid £500/week each, it would come to around £6,000 in wages, and then some more for the materials and paint – still a silly amount of money to spend, but I thought I must be overestimating. You can imagine my surprise, then, when the final figure came through - £16,635. Or, in real terms, a teaching assistant for a year, a community nurse, or perhaps two part time carers for the elderly or vulnerable. And all for one subway?!
Now, I could do a Victor Meldrew as I did with the Andrew 'Fingers' Mackay episode and have a good rant about the stupidity of this and try and shame the council, but I don't think that would make any difference. In the cold light of day, it's pretty clear that this funding was allocated to the responsible department, and they were spending their budget, as they're told to, in isolation from other departments. So I thought to myself, do something positive – get a meeting with the head of the department responsible, explain in simple terms how I understand things to be working with regards to departmental budgets, ask him or her to acknowledge that spending this much decorating a subway while we're reducing the 'essential' public services seems a bit loopy (a polite way of acknowledging the madness), and then ask him or her to join me in making an effort to change the way council funding is controlled. Clearly, if departmental budgets are the reason that spending this much renovating a subway is OK during times of austerity, then the process has to be changed. I can't, as a compassionate human, believe anyone would think that having our elderly die alone through lack of resources, children not getting the education they need, or social workers being too busy to save the abused child, is acceptable when £16,635 is spent painting a subway.
I did pass the FoI response to a few friends and asked them to comment. My good friend Dom suggested alternative ways of achieving a revamped subway, such as allowing the art department in the college to take ownership of it and allow the students to use it as a gallery for their work. I loved this idea, and it reeks of 'Big Society' so I contacted Lorraine Zutshi, the head of the Arts team at the college. She informed me that they used to be invited to decorate the subways, but this time round they weren't consulted at all. She also noted that she'd be delighted to be given the opportunity again, as they have a Community Art element to their syllabus – perfect!
Or perhaps having the long term unemployed engaged to paint them, allowing them to gain work skills, a bit of confidence, the feeling of doing something worthy with their time, and something to add to their CV's. I also had many people comment that a coat of paint would have sufficed, if indeed the subway painting is that important. Some also suggested using Community Service to get the job done and get them giving something back to the community.
For me, however, this issue runs deeper. I do appreciate that this is one small spend the council have made that seems to defy logic – I'm sure there are plenty more, and to be frank, I don't have the time or patience to uncover them all. But that doesn't matter – the important thing here, in my opinion, is to have the council think about how they organise their budgets, and make sure that this type of spend occurs after those services we all need (rather than those we would like) are funded. I think most other taxpayers would feel the same – at least my straw poll seems to suggest that's the case.
I therefore made an appointment to meet with Steve Loudoun, the Head of Environment and Public Protection, on Monday 6th June at 3pm. I took my camera along, and a copy of the memo sent by Bob Neill MP, the Under Secretary of State for the Department for Communities and Local Government, a link to which is here. In his memo, Bob makes clear that for open, transparent politics, it's perfectly acceptable for local bloggers and citizen journalists to film meetings with council staff, and to publish the film online. I genuinely had no intention of putting Steve on the spot, so I asked him for permission to film the meeting, which he declined. I then brought up the memo and he dismissed that straight away too. When I then asked if we could plan a subsequent meeting where he would be happy to talk to camera, he also refused. Hmmmm – so much for transparency and open government! Perhaps I broke the rules by filming him refusing to be filmed, but I did do the right thing and switched it off once it was clear he was not going to agree to be filmed that day. I wanted to be sure I'd given him every opportunity to decline and meet at a later date if that was his preference, with evidence of the same.
One other oddity with the brief meeting I had with Steve – he presented me with a response to question 4 of my FoI (FoI2 LINK), after the compliance officer had declared that the data wasn't held by the council and couldn't be provided – why is it one has to insist and be pushy to get answers to FoI requests? Or are they just routinely dismissing requests as a matter of course, showing more contempt to the residents of the borough? I think he probably thought he could hand over that answer to question 4, and that was his final word on the matter. Why are questions so difficult to deal with for public servants? You can see for yourself that there's nothing in his response to suggest he's thinking of anything outside his own remit. Oddly enough, he also mentions that 'there is no specific budget to repaint any other underpasses in the current fiscal year', yet the same company are painting the one outside Easthampstead House as I type! Has he got a grip on his own department? Who knows….
I don't want to get on the bad side of Steve. I'm convinced that as a compassionate man, he can, in his heart, see that spending £16,635 on subway decorating is madness when we're cutting essential services, but he's doing what he needs to do to be an effective Head of Environment and Public Protection. He might have a family, children to feed, the pressures we all have in our daily lives, so maybe he doesn't feel he can make that much difference without risking his position.
However, what he's not doing, along with other departmental heads at his level, is arguing that if the system allows this to happen, then the system must be broken and needs to be fixed. I wanted to suggest to him that this wasn't a witch hunt, or an embarrassing episode online to shame him into acting, but he refused me that opportunity. I honestly wanted to find an ally in the management hierarchy at BFBC who I could work alongside to try and change the systems and processes that can allow this to happen, and simply out of what I think is a reasonable, responsible, mature and compassionate need to see the right thing being done with the limited resources the council has, but Steve had decided before I'd even been given the chance to explain that he wasn't going to play ball.
I should know by now – video cameras and those spending tax payers money aren't happy bedfellows, and I can appreciate that he might not want to be 'on the record' with this somewhat controversial FoI response, but then what about open government? What about accountability? If Steve is comfortable spending this much money in times of austerity, why isn't he happy to talk about it on camera? I'm assuming he has nothing to hide? And lets not forget who actually pays for this – you and me, and Steve if he lives in Bracknell!!
I'm going to send Steve an email, asking him for another meeting, this time on camera. I'll also send him the memo from Bob Neill in the hope that he'll have a change of heart, and join me in a campaign to redress the processes that can allow this to happen.
I'm also not daft – if Steve isn't happy about talking on camera, then obviously he feels uncomfortable with being accountable and transparent which, as a public servant, is his responsibility, so I'm also planning to write to Bob Neill, and ask him to remind Steve of his obligations. Anything less than complete openness would be an insult to those who have lost essential services, contempt for the council taxpayer, and ignorance of central government policy. And I can't believe Steve is naïve to all that!
If you'd like to join me in an effort to turn the big BFBC ship round to serving the community, rather than it's own processes and methods, then please pipe up and drop me an email – the more of us shout about this, the more BFBC can't ignore, dismiss and refuse to engage. After all, do you feel happy losing your important public services so that you can have fancy subways? Me neither….
Bit of a pasting for my party last night nationally.
Now there are only two opposition councillors in the Bracknell Borough council as Labour council leader Jeananne Shillcock lost her seat by 5 votes. Harsh
An AV referendum debate between DR Philip Lee, Conservative MP for Bracknell and Fiona McTaggart, Labour MP for Slough will take place at Easthampstead Baptist Church Centre on 28th April on Thursday at 8pm.
Attendance is free and the full address is South Hill Road in Bracknell RG12 7NS.
I will be there to cover the event and hope to see as many of my local readers there as possible.
I have been too busy this week to blog, however I have been reading the web so here is a selection of issues making headlines during the past few weeks.
A Lib Dem councillor is accused of making a racist remark about a Labour MP on Twitter has been suspended from his party.He tweeted: "I'm waiting for the Labour guy to claim 'is it because I is black?' as a defense for being a muppet.", personally I worry that we go over the top on tweets. I don't find it that funny but I do think we are overly sensitive. After all we all know its an ally G quote right? I find myself agreeing with Jane on this one, 'what was she thinking of and what did he say'?
In a few weeks time I will be speaking to local Bracknell Conservative MP Dr Phillip Lee about what it's like becoming a new MP and how this has changed his life. I will be asking him a few other questions on general policy such as the NHS reforms.
If anyone has any other question that they would like to ask him then please post them in the comments below.
I have been too busy this week to blog, however I have been reading the web so here is a selection of issues making headlines during the past few weeks.
Local News
Reading lanches it's new fleet hybrid buses - Hybrid buses to hit the streets - Bracknells has had green buses for quite a few years now. Thanks to Courtney Coaches pure plant oil powered buses.
Tough targets for police amid cuts - 'Bracknell police will aim for the new targets despite Thames Valley Police’s plan to make almost £50 million of savings by 2015'.
Bracknell Forest Council has opened for consultation their plans for the future housing development here. Comments can be made on the website (I will post mine in due course).This is for the remaining 3,626 houses required of the 10,780 additional homes proposed by 2026.
The proposals include the heading 'Previously Developed Land in Defined Settlements'.
These sites are;
18 houses at Adastron House, Crowthorne Road, Bracknell
100 houses at Garth Hill School, Sandy Lane, Bracknell
14 houses on Land at Battle Bridge House, and Garage, Forest Road, Warfield
28 at Peacock Bungalow, Peacock Lane, Binfield
35 at Farley Hall, London Road, Binfield
77 at The Depot (Commercial Centre), Bracknell Lane West, Bracknell
40 at Albert Road Car Park, Bracknell
20 at The Iron Duke, Waterloo Place, Old Bakehouse Court, High Street, Crowthorne
216 at Land to the north of Eastern Road, Bracknell
Some of the sites above make sense like the Iron Duke which has been boarded up for quite some time. However it's the next list that I am most concerned about. When reading through the document I find that developed land includes parks and playing fields.
Other Land within Defined Settlements where policy SA 2 states 'Identified for housing and should be developed in accordance with the requirements identified in respect of each site and all general policy considerations.'
40 at Bay Drive, Bracknell
85 at The Football Ground, Larges Lane, Bracknell
10 at 24-30 Sandhurst Road, Crowthorne
100 at Land at Cricket Field Grove, Crowthorne
20 at Land at School Hill, Crowthorne
11 at Sandbanks, Longhill Road, Bracknell (Winkfield Parish)
75 at Land north of Cain Road, Binfield
12 at 152 New Road, Ascot (Winkfield Parish)
What caught my eye was the Football ground and Cricket Field Grove. This would mean a new location would have to be found for Bracknell FC (which has been looked at before).
Details of the sites can be viewed here and the maps are here.
Of course this is a consultation so these houses won't go ahead at all locations but it's worth getting in your thoughts about the developments now. Click on link here for your comments as they will be considered.
I was in Last Thursdays Bracknell Standard What Does Bracknell Think. This time the panel was asked
This week's question is about the way people speak.
The British Library is doing some research into the way pronunciations of words are changing and have noted that under 35's pronounce certain words in different ways to older people indicating that language is changing.
What we want to know this week is what people's pet hates about the way others speak are? For example, does it make you cringe when someone pronounces the word 'schedule' 'skedule', to the letter 'h' 'haitch'?
Or do you think it really doesn't matter and people should lighten up a bit?
And my answer;
I certainly don't use the English language perfectly, for example I say 'guard' in stead of 'god'. It doesn't bother me. You can't expect language not to change over time if it's in constant use.
The only thing that really bothers me is when people end every sentence with a raised emphasis on the end making the sentence sound like a question.
It also bothers me when people judge others as being less than themselves based on their use of language.
Taxi drivers fight for cap on licences - Personally I support them in this, there are a lot of drivers and it must be hard to make a living. If the level is right then perhaps they could charge less as turnover would be higher.
Tony Jones thinks that Reading Lib Dem Councilor Daisy's Dilemma: Back Bayes And Sacrifice Epps? - Personally I think Tony has forgotten a major factor which is hard work. Daisy Benson works very hard as do the other Reading Lib Dem councillors, I believe this will stand them in good stead. They don't need a campaign as they are on the doorstep all the time anyway. Doing case work and looking after the interests of the area.
Green Reading in Woolas Hypocrisy has some examples in Reading of how dirty local campaigns can get. Personally I really hate this type of politics. The sooner this Woolas ruling washes through all parties the better for all of us.
And finally this weeks entertainment is provided by my chance to indulge myself in a political music video. This week it'sThe Disposable Heroes Of Hiphoprisy with their tale of California Uber Alles, enjoy;
Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards John Lyon has today has today said that "Mr Mackay's decision to claim that the property in Bromsgrove was his main home was a serious misjudgement which was sustained over more than 12 years." he also added, "Mr Mackay should have recognised that it was not right, or defensible, to come to an arrangement which he knew would mean that parliamentary allowances would be used to cover costs incurred on both his homes."
Mackay and his wife Julie Kirkbride (MP for Bromsgrove constituency) have paid back £29,243 each earlier this year after Mackay claimed £1,000 a month for their flat in Westminster and Julie Kirkbride who claimed £900 a month for their house in Bromsgrove. Meaning that the couple had no main home. i.e no home that they were not claiming against and paying for themselves.
The committee concluded that Mr MacKay should now apologise in writing and that if he had still been an MP, he would have been suspended and would have had to appologies to the house.
Andrew Mackay of course still believes that he has done nothing wrong. So I'm not expecting to see an apology. but If he does I will publish it in full on this blog.
Readers should be reminded that Andrew Mackay is now working for the lobbying division of the Burson-Marsteller and Julie Kirkbride is now working for lobbying company Tetra Strategy.
It's not right is it Andrew? Please can you apologies to the people of Bracknell and recognise that what you did was wrong!
If you need a reminder of the events leader to Andrew Mackay resignation then please have a read my blog here.
It's nice to see the Bracknell Regeneration Partnership has been busy in one area. Their website for example http://www.bracknell.com has been up and running for a few months now. There is plenty of news and event details on the site etc but if you click on regeneration all you will see a short statement, but no actual news on the regeneration. Remember this is the Bracknell Regeneration Partnership website.
So in other words, so far they have nothing more to add. No news is bad news in this case.
'Hospital loan not a bail out' - A GOVERNMENT loan of £18million to the trust that runs two hospitals in Ascot and Slough is “not a bail out”.
Family homeless back on Civvy St - A war veteran, his wife and their two sons are having to live in a single room at his parents’ because they do not qualify for council support.
My fat face is once again in the 'What Does Bracknell Think?' column of the Bracknell Standard.
The question asked was "The Government has admitted more than six million people have paid either too much or too little tax over the past year. Some people face paying back around £1,400 and some will even receive a rebate. The Inland Revenue says the money must be paid back within a year, is this fair as it is that organisation that has made the mistake?
My response published in the paper was;
Yet again a government computer system was not up to the job. In a way it's like a lottery waiting to see if you win or lose this week.
Bearing this in mind then it is tempting to say it is an Inland Revenue mistake therefore they must pay for their errors. But it is right that people pay their proper amount of tax and that refunds are made inline with this. At least it can be paid back over time. But I suspect if I get a bill for £1,400 I won't be very happy about it.
