So we have started!
Glad to get on with it after the past nine months of delivering and canvassing.
Immediately priority was sending out a targeted letter which my hard working members have spent the past two days stuffing. We were also at Surbiton Station for a time and a resident said they would not take a leaflet as he had spent the past four hours stuffing my face into an envelope.
We got moved on from the station by the Station Manager. New policy means that we cannot leaflet on railway property. We could do from the pavement but the trouble is you are liable to a fine from the Council. So instead we went and delivered the leaflet into St. Mark's ward. Covered about 1500 properties between the 8 of us. Also had deliveries going out across the other wards.
Also saw the first Lib Dem leaflet. Amusingly they refer to me as Michael Howard's Conservative. I think they believe that associating me with Michael Howard is a bad thing. Does not bother me, after all he is the Conservative Leader. Maybe they should read the polls a bit more which quite clearly demonstrate that irrespective of which party people vote for Kennedy trails a very poor third when asked the question: "Who would make the best Prime Minister?" Given that were there a hung Parliament it would be the Lib Dem's going into coalition with this awful Government maybe I should start referring to the Lib Dem candidate here as "Blair's Lib Dem".
We are holding a public meeting on Thursday to kick off the campaign, all are welcome.
Ended the day with a pint in the Antelope in Maple Road.
23 comments:
Don't forget to draw attention to 3G masts during your canvassing. Berrylands appears to be under seige from the 3G networks at the moment and you are still a Ward Councillor.
Undecided voter in Berrylands
Also, even though you originally voted to have it implemented, don't forget to highglight the stupidity of the King Charles Rd Traffic Calming Scheme and how Ward Councillors must resist wasting public money just to please voters in the short term. The same goes for your u-turn on humps.
Another Undecided Voter from Berrylands
Don't mind comments except when they resort to half truths and lies. I have done no "u turn" on humps! I have never voted for a scheme that has included humps.
As for King Charles Road, I made perfectly clear at the last Council meeting on this issue that I am happy to see traffic calming of this nature installed if it is safe. As many people who use this area are aware this scheme is not safe and officers of the Council should not have installed such a scheme with the degree of flaws in it that have emerged.
No Councillors on Kingston Council are trained traffic engineers.The Council employs, at significant cost, traffic engineers who should know what they are doing and they got this scheme wrong. There needs to be a fundamental rellok at this scheme and not just the implementation the half hearted painting of a few lines that the Lib Dems proposed at the recent meeting.
I believe there has only ever been one Kevin Davis that sits on Kingston Council and the record shows that he originally voted for the stupid scheme in King Charles Rd to be implemented when the Conservatives controlled the Council.
Surely it is therefore a little disingenuous of you to now attempt to distance yourself from that decision by blaming Council Engineers or current Councillors who have clearly only proposed amendments to try and make good YOUR mistake?
The implementation of the scheme in King Charles Road was voted through in 2003 when the Lib Dems controlled the Council.
The earlier scheme was to put raised platforms at the junction of Berrylands Road and Hollyfield Road. This was voted through in 2000. This worked perfectly well and was voted through when the Council was under no overall control.
The Conservatives have not been in control of Kingston Council since 1994.
I have not in my comments critiscised any Councillor of any party over the original scheme because none of us believe it acceptable. I will not accept though that we should spend more taxpayers money on this scheme until a full review has been undertaken, including the option to rip it out and start again.
I have blogged on this many times and you can see the consistency of my argument.
Unfortunately Kevin, you are playing with words, precisely what puts people off politics and politicians.
In 2000, you were a member of Surbiton Neighbourhood Committee which was controlled ENTIRELY by Conservatives who also were the largest party on the Council and which formed the administration.
However, the fact remains it was Conservative-controlled Surbiton Neighbourhood that voted for and implemented the original scheme. Not any other party, not the hung council, not Tony Blair, not the MP - but Conservatives in Surbiton.
The raised platforms have also been labelled unsafe and so I am glad you have now conceeded that you wrongly supported their introduction too.
I disagree with your view. The first scheme for raised tables was entirely acceptable and works well. Although I do believe the street furniture used is pretty basic and looks visually unnatractive.
The chicane arrangement was voted through in 2004. It is a dangerous mess. Against the wishes of the Lib Dems, who wanted to paint more yellow lines, the residents now have a working party set up to have their say over what should happen. That is entirely appropriate. You too clearly do not like it so I would hope you will raise your views through that consultation process.
You can check the facts on www.kingston.gov.uk where they record the minutes of the meetings. However, you will find the record does not show who voted for what as votes are not recorded on Council minutes. I did however voted for the first scheme. In the second instance I voted for the final decision on the scheme to be delgated to the Chairmen of the neighbourhood and one ward Councillor.
Kevin, I will indeed express my concerns in the consultation process but it still doesn't change the fact that it's no use having a local Councillor who tries to absolve himself from blame at every turn - and who then wishes to gain our support so he can represent the whole borough where he can wreak even more havoc.
I am not absolving myself of blame as that would be ludicrous. But I will also not seek to defend the indefensible. Councillors take decisions and Councillors must accept they must take action when things go wrong. They went wrong and I and all the Councillors, of whatever party, are seeking to put them right. I am merely saying that officers need to be held to account as to why they allowed Councillors to approve what has emerged as a dangerous scheme. Traffic engineers are the experts and neither you nor a Councillor has the professional expertise to question what they put before Councillors for approval.
This scheme went wrong, Councillors of all parties approved it and they have asked for it to be put right.
I made this perfectly clear in my earlier comments and you seem to want to go around in circles seemingly trying to score points:
"I made perfectly clear at the last Council meeting on this issue that I am happy to see traffic calming of this nature installed if it is safe. As many people who use this area are aware this scheme is not safe and officers of the Council should not have installed such a scheme with the degree of flaws in it that have emerged."
Nothing more I can usefully add because we both agree the scheme is dangerous and we both want something done about it.
Kevin, it is a pity we have had to go "around in circles" as you put it in order for you to finally admit that Councillors of ALL parties approved this stupid scheme rather than the line you were orignally attempting to take criticising the Lib-Dems of half-heartedly trying to fix it.
Whatever the advice from Council Officers, any of you could have simply rejected that advice which was blatantly wrong and didn't need one to be a traffic engineer but I can understand if it was tempting to appease local residents rather than rely on common sense. Looking after our interests and addressing our concerns in a responsible way is surely what we elect you to do?
Anyway, I am pleased to note that you are intending working with all Councillors to find a solution to this and would suggest that your first arrow be directed towards the Council Officer who dreamt up this ridiculous scheme instead of trying to score any more political points.
Yes, I agree. Stop spinning this issue, sack the council officer and use common sense when deciding things in future. Advice is only advice - nobody forces you to take it.
Unfortunately this is where it is the repsonsibility of the Lib Dems and not me. I am not running this council, they are, and taking action to sort out the highways department is something I can call for, as I have, but ultimately only they can implement, which they have not.
My goodness, what a lot of hot air about something pretty simple. Let me see if I've got this right - all parties approved schemes in 2000 and 2003 as a result of advice from the Council's traffic engineers. The 2003 scheme is now acknowledged as dangerous. The Lib Dems went for the cheap option of painting lines on the road to fix it. The Conservatives asked and got instead a residents working party to help figure out what really needs to be done. Somehow I don't think it was the truth about the scheme that anonymous wanted in the open, merely a chance to have a go at Kevin.
As for the 3G masts mentioned in the first comment - Kevin has been involved with all of us protesting the masts. If this is the issue that decides whether you vote Lib Dem or Tory, maybe you should be aware that it was a Lib Dem councillor who voted through the first phone mast scheme and who then hypocritically did an about face and started a petition against the very thing she had just voted for.
Now who's going around in circles?
Surbiton Neighbourhood is controlled by 6 Tories and 6 Lib-Dems. Trying to pin this stupid scheme on the Lib-Dems alone is again playing politics with road user's safety. For the scheme to have been further developed post 2002, it required the Tories either to vote for it along with the Lib-Dems or to abstain like cowards so that you could blame the Lib-Dems for implementing it if it went wrong.
And now you have the cheek to say the mess you were responsible for originally creating is down to the Lib-Dems to sort out because they run the Council!
At last, something of interest to me - 3G masts.
"As for the 3G masts mentioned in the first comment - Kevin has been involved with all of us protesting the masts".
Hold on!!!
It is minuted that Councillor Kevin Davis left the meeting that approved the Orange 3G mast in Raeburn Avenue because he had already expressed a view. Why didn't you stay to persaude others through discussion to vote against it rather than leave the decision to the Chair?
Moving on. It has become apparent to me during my communcications with the Lib Dem Councillor you mentioned, Orange, Hutchison and The Surbiton Neighbourhood Planning Manager that there is very little that can be done to stop the Network Operators once they have set their heart on a site - they have a statutory right to put these things up wherever they like. Further to this, the Neighbourhood Committee & Planning Manager appeared to be restrained by the threat of a financial penalty which may result in larger increases in Council Tax charges.
The only way out I feel does not involve democratically elected officers but council employed officers, i.e. the Traffic Engineers berated for King Charles Rd Traffic Calming scheme, creating sufficient street clutter so that these things cannot be put up. Another waste of money maybe but Council Taxes will go up anyway - let us at least have something to marvel at in awe!
Rome wasn't built in a day!
Enjoy the campaign everyone.
( Still ) Undecided voter in Berrylands
I don't think its really fair to blame Kevin for leaving the meeting - as I understand it, because of where he lives and because he has been involved opposing the masts, he has a prejudicial interest and so morally and (I think) legally he couldn't stay in the room and try and persuade others to vote the way he wanted them to.
Secondly, if you genuinely believe there is nothing elected members can do, why should it matter to you that Kevin left the room?!
I personally believe that elected members have a very important role to play in opposing these masts. I shan't blame them if the masts end up being erected though as I know they will have tried hard to stop it from happening. What I won't accept is a Councillor being down right stupid and voting for something one minute and then trying to get votes by opposing it the next.
You say that :
"I shan't blame them if the masts end up being erected though as I know they will have tried hard to stop it from happening"
If he had of stayed in the room, he could have tried harder!
He was elected to represent his constituents and that is why it is important to me.
So, if/when ( delete as applicable!) Kevin turns around a Lib Dem majority of thousands and enters Parliament, will he walk out of a debate whenever something he has a prejudicial interest in arises?
Surely not!
Don't balme the chair of that meeting for casting the deciding vote - she should never have been put in that position. Public feeling is against these masts and why elected officials cannot realise this defeats me.
TTFN
You say: 'Don't balme the chair of that meeting for casting the deciding vote - she should never have been put in that position.'
I'm sorry but, respectfully, I can't accept this comment. The Chair was in that position because she accepted the role of chairperson with the consequent renumeration for special responsibility. If she wasn't capable of shouldering this special responsibility she shouldn't have beecome Chair. A casting vote is a normal and fairly common procedure, especially in Surbiton so she can't say she was taken by surprise.
The reason she had to place a casting vote was that the Committee was split down the middle, not because Kevin left the room. If Kevin had stayed he would have laid himself open to a complaint to the standards board and quite rightly been kicked off the council.
Maybe what this debate proves is that planning matters should be decided at Council rather than neighbourhood level, meaning that none of those with a vote would have to step out of the room due to living too close to the application.
"A casting vote is a normal and fairly common procedure, especially in Surbiton"
That's an eye opener to me but it still doesn't reconcile my disbelieve in that half those who voted YES obviously believed that the residents of Berrylands wanted the 3G mast. You don't happen to who they were do you?
Ah well, I'm sure that there will be a few more surprises over the next 4 weeks that will make me wonder what is going on!
Have a nice weekend, I'm off to enjoy it.
I'm afraid I don't remember exactly how the voting went. Maybe Kevin can enlighten us?
Kevin,
Who is on the Surbiton Neighbourhood Planning Committee & where they all in attendance at that meeting.
And, please detail the vote broken down by party for the Orange 3G mast in Raeburn Avenue.
PS.
"I'm afraid I don't remember exactly how the voting went. Maybe Kevin can enlighten us? "
Where you there as an observer or councillor?
I am utterly opposed to the Raeburn Avenue phone mast. I was not present because planning, unlike other Council functions, (except Licencing) has a quasi judicial nature to it. In the interests of supposed fairness it is not appropriate for me to vote or sit in the room or attempt to influence a decision when a Councillor is a near neighbour to an application or has already declared how they will vote. Any Councillor who speaks to a resident and clearly states they are for or against an application "blights" themselves from participating in that decision.
In view of my "blight", through proximity, I had issued press releases back last year when a limited number of residents received consultation leaflets.
Who voted? No idea as I was not there and the minutes do not record it. All I know, which I heard from residents afterwards, is that it was a split vote and it went through on the casting vote of the Lib Dem Chairman, who had previously voted against it.
I have said quite a lot on this subject elsewhere so rather than go over it all again I will let you look under:
http://www.ksca.org.uk/news_detail.php?nid=324
or
http://www.ksca.org.uk/news_detail.php?nid=318
or
http://kevindavis.blogspot.com/2005/02/new-work.html
or
http://kevindavis.blogspot.com/2004/08/chessington-team-and-phone-masts.html#comments
I was not abale to vote because I live near the site of the potential mast.
The chairman had previously voted against the mast but when the vote was split changed her casting vote.
Post a Comment