The South West’s annual ‘Jam Busting June’ event broke all records this year, with a massive 20% increase on last year’s numbers.

Almost 3,500 people took part in the event, which encourages people in the West of England area to use alternative forms of transport, other than single occupancy cars to get to work.
Commuters who who registered and filled in online diaries about how they travelled to and from work every day had a chance to win prizes donated by local businesses. A prize-draw will take place later this month.

Run by the four local councils of Bath & North East Somerset, Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire, the high participation rate was thought to be due to a number of factors, including the support of major employers and more awareness of sustainable transport.

What this shows is that travel patterns can be changed with encouragement, motivation and support. Instead Conservative controlled B&NES just wants to spend millions on roads that will deliver very little improvement to congestion. Jam Busting June should have a similar campaign for every month of the year.

Six years ago I was approached by several members of the Chinese community in Bath about the issues and concerns they had. Most importantly they wanted to form their own society (Bath East ASian and Chinese Friends Group) and have their own office space. At the time I was Council leader and supported them in forming the committee, finding office space, getting some funding in place. Six years on they are going strong, have diverse funding, provide a number of activities and help and support their community.

The good news in the AGM was that as a community they have had no race incidents in the last year and have put on more and more translation services and social activities. I have now attended 4 out of the 6 AGMs and this was a really positive meeting.

The new committee voted in today had a number of new members and returning members.

The bad news is that they are already looking to ensure financial stability in the year 10/11. At least they are preparing and doing advance thinking.

After the AGM good food and conversation as usual.

I am a recent twitterer – twitter name paulncrossley – and posted a tweet this afternoon on the BEACH AGM. Beach is the Bath East Asian and Chinese Friends group which I helped set up 6 years ago when I was Council Leader. Since then I have worked and supported them and they are now a thriving society.

However within an hour of the Tweet(the first where I have used the words China or Chinese) I have attracted a new follower The China Post –

Coincidence, scary, compliment or what?  It shows the power of the web I suppose.

An example of the emails that are coming in on this nonsense

I was furious at the result of the planning meeting yesterday. After apparently succeeding in having the ridiculous BRT rejected at planning, there was in effect a revote. The objectors were not given time or legal recourse to frame their objections, forcing them to speak without even consultation to each other. I think this was entirely undemocratic – a rejection is quite simply what it was. I trust that the Lib Dems are equally outraged and will ensure that the legality of the process is examined and challenged. Politicians are already held in historically low esteem and this type of underhand action reinforces why. I look forward to seeing the response to this farce from our local councillors.

This afternoon the last item of business was to consider proposals from residents for the Council to submit to the LGA for the new Sustainable Communities Act. One group of young people came with an exciting proposal for BANES to the lead the way and become a pilot for STV elections based on two member wards with bi-ennial elections , reducing the voting age to 16 and setting up a citizen power of recall. This was aimed at restoring trust in democracy and re-engaging young people in democracy.

Whilst I did not agree with every detail of their suggestion the idea of Local Government moving to STV as in Scotland is great and reducing the voting age is also a must. I think their recall idea needs working on as I think it has got mixed up with the reprehensible behaviour of some MPs in Westminster. Talking of which when will any of them face fraud charges for claiming for non-existent mortgages?

This was part of the Make my Vote Count campaign and it deserves consideration. I shall try to ensure that the decision on which scheme to submit to the LGA is taken in a public Cabinet meeting and not behind closed doors.

The planning committee discussed the scheme for a big extension to the Newbridge park and ride and the creation of a rapid bus highway last night. The motion to approve failed – a sensible decision but then the motion to reject also failed – not a sensible decison and so the scheme has been deferred.

The problem is that the Conservative Cabinet has been intransigent about listening to viable alternatives put forward by the Liberal Democrats last autumn and have continued to press on with what is increasingly becoming obvious to all as a complete waste of money that will not deliver good outcomes for Bath residents, will not reduce congestion and will ruin a really nice green corridor which could be developed for cyclists and walkers. Instead we have a 1 mile highway to hell proposal.

The Conservative Cabinet has got itself too hooked onto the fact that it wants government money than really address the issue as to what the best solution is and has turned what was originally envisaged as a light rail route in along the old rail line into a two lane super road.

The Cabinet today had several papers but no interest from the public or the press. It was interesting today on radio 4 listening to the managing director of the Mirror Group blaming Councils for the demise of local papers because local councils publish 4 magazines or papers a year. I think thats now three cabinet meetings on the trot when the local paper have not been present to hear what is said. She was also blaming the BBC for having a good web site. Rather than blaming everyone else she needs to look at why her national and local papers are failing and it is probably down to the content I would suggest.

The Conservative Cabinet was considering several important papers – on the West of England Multi Area Agreement I called on them to pull out as in my view it is not meeting our needs. They have decided to delay signing up because of the tension over the Regional Spatial Strategy housing numbers.

On the police plan I asked them to add two extra parts basically urging the local police to keep stationing beat teams in the community and to do some work on developing the PACT process. They ignored these requests.

The rest of my contributions can be read in the attached document. Only two members of the public turned up to hear our Conservative cabinet consider these papers. In marked contrast to the planning application on one of their traffic schemes that went through a similar empty cabinet meeting a while ago.

As politicians we need to find ways to get communities to engage when plans and ideas are being developed and not only when the planning phase comes at the end of the process.

Well this system wont allow me to load up a Word Document for some reason so here it is in line text

Cabinet B&NES July 8 2009

 

Community Strategy

On behalf of the Liberal Democrat group we welcome this productive refresh of the Community Strategy commenced in 2002. The Community Strategy plays an important part in modern local governance bringing as it does a number of public service providers, residents and the Council together in a shared objective for our area. Our staff are to be complimented on the work to date and its progress and implementation. For me the key word in the title is SUSTAINABLE. This must really underpin all the work we do.

 

I particularly welcome the fact that addressing climate change is emphasised as a cross-cutting theme throughout the strategy and the LSP.

However, I note that the children and young people chapter doesn’t have anything in the box for “how does this help address the causes and effects of climate change”, which does seem a little odd. Renewable energy, Healthy Schools and improvements under building schools for the future all have an impact in addressing climate change.

 

It is good that the LSP will be looking to provide community leadership on carbon reduction – good to be looking beyond ‘putting our own house in order’,.

 

The Liberal Democrats believe that this Council should be looking to be a beacon for environmental policies. The Council has been innovative in the past e.g. first to adopt zero waste, farmers’ market and our local residents are very keen on environmental issues e.g. transition movements, keen on recycling. The Council shouldn’t be afraid to aim to be in the vanguard of introducing innovative policies.

On a general point I would like to see more goals and targets in addition to aspirations. It is only by setting challenges that we can measure against that we will truly be able to judge value for money in the work we do. And value for money is one of the main concerns of many residents in these difficult financial times. There’s also the issue of the language of the report – some sections are quite full of jargon and bullet points with no explanations.

For me a key determinant on whether we have made our area a better place by 2026 is whether or not we have “closed the gap” or in terms that everyone understands have we delivered a community where the life chances at birth for all our residents are fair and equitable – in life expectancy, in educational opportunity, in the ability to live here and work here.

In developing our communities in the future one thing is for certain – more of our residents are better informed and want to be included in the decision and policy making process. This citizen engagement is not only being driven by the internet in all its forms but also by resident groups and forums who want their say and want to be heard.

On a cautionary note I would advise against the aspiration to be one of Europe‘s fastest growing economies. This takes us down the boom’n’bust road and raises expectations and fuels inflation. We should be aiming for a diverse economy with a range of employment opportunities and an economy that builds on the strengths that two universities and two colleges bring.  Is it good that the economic section of this report is based on the growth projections from the RSS? Especially as in other areas we challenge these growth targets as unrealistic.

Can I again commend to you the work that the Re:Generate Trust are doing in the Whiteway Community as mentioned twice in this report.. You will recall that three summers ago when we were having a number of issues in the community we agreed as an LSP to look for a new way of working and that following a tender process Re:Generate was selected. At the time there was some doubt as to what could be achieved but nine months on we are starting to see some fantastic outcomes in the community from the model of work that Re:Generate use. I think this is a model of community building and empowerment that we could well uses in several other communities across our authority area – from Radstock to Keynsham to Foxhill.

With those broad comments I welcome this paper..

 

 

Performance report 2008/9

When this current Cabinet took control of the Council it inherited a well performing Council that was moving forward in most areas and delivering good services. With this report we start to see the rise of complacency.
This is something that must not be allowed to continue.

I would urge that your recommendation 2.1 be much stronger  and that poor performance must be addressed and improved and that merely discussing progress is an inadequate response to hide behind.

I think the Council should give more credit to the work of the 58 Councillors not in the Cabinet. An example of this is where credit is claimed on page 7 for the work of the Children’s Society in a restorative Justice programme. Work that came directly for myself and Cllr Romero being in with the community and working forward to a resolution both with the community but also with the police and the Children’s society.

Again in this report as with the last – several references are made to the Re:Generate project and the outcomes are there for all to see – 300+ community volunteer hours in the Keep Clean part of a Deep Clean Keep Clean exercise. This in marked contrast to the disaster from the previous time when Charles Gerrish, myself and Dine Romero had to work with the community to quickly sort it and also hold our hands up and apologize for the planning failure. The use of third sector in these innovative ways is to be applauded and the LSP as a whole and the Council in particular need credit for this innovative scheme.

On the down side I am very concerned at the lack of progress for our looked after children, the support to carers, lack of real progress on waste. Samer Day collections are a good step forward even if later than originally planned. It is not working in all neighbourhoods yet and the publicity drive needs to be maintained to make a success of this. On congestion I believe that increasing evidence is against the P&R solution which is looking increasingly like a solution from the 1990s and certainly the BRT should be shelved at this time. There are far better solutions than this expensive mile of highway to hell. Lets get more people cycling for a start – CYCLESCHEME NOW please – lets look at village hub parking and improved bus connectivity. Lets look at the school run with far more intent on solving this problem as the main way of tackling congestion.

In looking at one of the big ideas of “reducing the gap” Fuel Poverty NI 187 and S20 Get ACtive will be crucial. By promoting these two strands and linking in with a healthy lifestyle approach in particular we will do more to have “Reduced the Gap” by 2026.

I welcome that NI 175 has not been changed to NI 176 – a softer target as discussed in March. Presumably this was as a result of GOSW negotiations.

To conclude the LAA is on track but there is no room for complacency and the Cabinet should look to ways of ensuring that all Councillors are involved in this. After all the LAA is a Council committment and not just a Cabinet scheme.

 

 

WEP MAA

The Liberal Democrat group remained concerned about the increasing use of the West of England as a delivery forum for services and investment for our community. We regret that at the last cabinet the decision to put our LSC share into an WEP pot was taken rather than bringing it back to Banes. I agree with Daviod Cameron’s stated desire to reduce the number of quangos and do not want to see WEP evolve into one.

We consider that the Council should be looking ata greater range of partnering opportunities rather than just concentrating on WEP. For example we consider that on waste we have more csynergy with Somerset and on housing and consequent congestion the impact of Wiltshire on us is far more significant than Bristol or S Glos.

On the economy we do not support the expansion of Bristol airport which we think will adversly affect our rural areas. BUT we do support the ability of Bristol Port to service our country now and into the future and are greatly concerned that the WEP decided to support the Government proposals to investigate the large barrage. This inability of the WEP to proceed on design inovation for our region through a variety of new tidal solutions and opt for a three barage consultation show in our view that WEP does not deliver good economic outcomes for the region and has a priority set different to ours.

On skills we consider this better done from within Banes by developing our resources.

All in all this document leaves too many unanswered questions, not enough firm targetting and not enough assurance that we will get anything positive out if it. It puts too much pressure on us setting our agenda according to the needs of other authorities.

We suggest that the Cabinet should seriously consider withdrawing from this process.

 

Community Safety Plan

The Liberal Democrats welcome this plan but would ask the cabinet to consider 2 extra recommendations

2.2 The Avon and Somerset Police be urged to continue and expand the practice of stationing Beat teams in the Community
and
2.3 The Avon and Somerset Police in partnership with the LSP look at ways to spread best practice of PACT meetings so that they can develop across the authority as effective community forums.

We welcome this plan and the pledge from the police that is contained within it. The reason we are asking you to consider two extra recommendations is firstly that the stationing of beat police teams with the community has proved highly effective and productive. It ensures that were this is happening the team is close by the community and therefore is more easily identified and recognized. It also means that more of the police time is spent within the community as opposed to traveling to and from the community.

The plan itself highlights the PACT process  and we believe that PACTS are currently a forum that is working with varying degrees of success and/or failure. In some wards it is not working at all and in some it is developing into an effective forum.  O&S are regulalry scrutinising the PACT process. If the PACT is to work then we need to develop what works well in the first place and not have rigid targets to meet. In Southdown the PACT is working because the Councillors, Council, Somer and the Police Beat Team are working together to make it work well. This means consultation and preparation and co-operation between all. With reference back to my suggested amendments, to earlier papers and comments about ReGenerate could this  be a task that they are commissioned to take over and develop for us.

 

In conclusion this is a good plan with good priorities although again we would welcome more clarity in terms of targets and outcomes.

 

The LGA conference in Harrogate was a useful meeting of Councillors from all parties and from across the country and also with officers too. David Cameron gave a polished speach which contained several contradictions – especially on reorganisations. First he said there would be no further change and then he said he wants many more elected city mayors.

Vince Cable, as ever, gave a great speach analysing the economic woe that is facing us and setting out a stall of change required.

His speach

Vince Cable delivers speech on localism to LGA conference

Liberal Democrat Shadow Chancellor, Vince Cable today delivered a speech on localism to the Local Government Association annual conference in Harrogate .

In his speech, he discussed the ways in which local government can be harnessed to avoid the boom and bust of recession. He said that

councils should be given greater powers over their own funding with the ability to set business rates and greater freedom to borrow against their own assets. He also said that scrapping selected area targets could make savings of almost £1bn.

Vince Cable said:

‘Localism’ has become one of those irritating bits of language which we politicians have learnt to throw around like confetti along with: ‘stakeholder empowerment’, ‘people focussed synergies’, ‘win win’ ‘game plans’, ‘direction of travel’, ‘at the end of the day’ and ‘he doesn’t get it’. I personally believe in never letting a good cliché go to waste. But localism is a dangerous cliché because it means such different things to different people.

There is the ‘localism’ which involves strengthening the autonomy of schools, colleges and other bodies by stripping local authorities of their role. There is the localism which really means individual choice at the expense of local community choice. There is localism in the form of regional devolution; devolution to local authorities; and devolution within local authorities. I want to talk about localism in the traditional sense of decentralisation to local communities and their elected councils: not just because I am talking to you but because I believe it is right, and an urgent priority. That is what my party means by localism though I am not sure it is true of our opponents.

I speak with some feeling on the subject having served as a much younger man as city councillor in the early 1970s when councils had serious powers, before they were emasculated by successive governments. Even at that time local councils had shrunk in status and scope from the bodies which once inhabited those Victorian monuments of civic pride in Birmingham , Manchester , Liverpool or Glasgow where I served. I don’t want to glamorise what was often pretty unedifying. I was part of a Tammany Hall, one party, machine. Several of my colleagues went to Barlinnie Prison for various low crimes and misdemeanours (though, arguably, no worse than what many of today’s MPs have been guilty of). Nor am I proud of having voted for projects like the 32 storey Red Road housing development. But for that generation of councillors, local government meant something: it wasn’t an oxymoron.

As a young idealistic and energetic councillor I was able to shape and make good policy on big issues: stopping an urban motorway programme promoted by central government and officials and redirecting money and energy to public transport; stopping large scale slum clearance in favour of improvement and renovation, all without reference to central government departments. I have never been sure whether to conceal or boast about my role as a ‘refusenik’ trying to block, illegally, new legislation to stop councils providing free school meals or to set rents. Some councillors were eventually surcharged for this defiance. That last battle sadly marked a key stage in the nationalisation of local government.

My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I want to see the pull of over-centralised government put into reverse. We have to start by dismantling the command and control apparatus. I find it extraordinary that elected councillors are expected to compete for star ratings awarded by some unelected quango, like young children collecting points from a teacher for good behaviour. This makes a mockery of local democracy. I believe that a prospective Headmaster, the leader of the opposition, is coming here later this morning to hand out black marks to bad councils.  This is the same preachy lack of respect for local government, whether it is dressed up in deepest red or palest blue.

Of course I accept that like national government, local government has to have an Ombudsman to appeal maladministration and an independent auditor. But beyond that the safeguard on good government has to be the local electorate, with a reformed voting system as in Scotland , to be fully representative. The whole control system should be scrapped and the savings repatriated to councils to invest in local services or lower council tax.

Even after the cuts in the Comprehensive Area Assessment there are still 35 negotiated area targets and 200 national indicators. We would scrap almost all of these except perhaps quality of care for Looked After Children and Adult Social Care. Cutting the compliance cost of regulation could perhaps save £800 million to £1 billion. Nor is there any need for a Standards Board with its disgraceful kangaroo courts; investigating councillors without even telling the councillor being accused. Then there are the convoluted processes around, for example, Building Schools for the Future which absorb ludicrous amounts of resources.

But Central Government will – quite understandably – demand to control what it finances. As long as 75% of council funding comes from Central Government, Central Government will call the tune. No amount of sloganising about ‘localism’ will alter this simple fact. In countries where devolution is meaningful, local or regional government has a strong and diverse revenue base be they American states or the regions of Denmark and Sweden . The obvious way to move in that direction in the UK is to repatriate business rates going far beyond the current highly qualified business district scheme.  This would lift the share of local funding from 25% to around 50%. Local government is already the collecting agency. The issue is not practicality but trust: trust in councils’ ability to operate a system of business tax without killing business. I think a lot of lessons have been learnt in local as well as national government about the importance of attracting rather than repelling business and the jobs it generates. Business critics of devolution are, I think, still living with memories of the 1970s rather than today’s realities. If there are risks in the future it is, if anything, in the opposite direction: of a tax cut bidding war.

The idea that councils will behave more responsibly if they are given more responsibility applies more widely. Councils should have greater freedom to borrow against their own assets – widening the scope for prudential borrowing. If they miscalculate, they pay the price as some have with high yielding Icelandic bank deposits. If they are successful, on the other hand, they have the opportunity to do much more locally through public investment.

I was as disappointed as many of you will have been with the minister’s announcement on Tuesday that the Government is still consulting, after many years, on whether to allow councils to keep the proceeds of sales of council houses and rents for new investment. Nothing, in any event, will happen before an election it will probably lose. There is a desperate need at present, for economic as well as social reasons, to invest in affordable housing, reviving a moribund construction industry as well as meeting housing need. If the shackles attaching local government to Whitehall were cut much more could be done.

The context of this discussion is not an abstract one about the relative powers of central and local government but a severe economic crisis. There is currently an unholy alliance of bankers, government ministers and commentators bored with bad news telling us that the crisis has passed: that recovery is around the corner. It would be surprising if there weren’t some signs of recovery since the Bank of England, the Government (and other Governments) have thrown the kitchen sink at the problem: near zero interest rates, quantitative-easing, extraordinary budget deficits, a big devaluation and nationalising half the banking system. But the issue is: what are we recovering from? I don’t believe we have just had a dose of flu, returning to normal after a nasty fever; but a massive economic heart attack. The patient may have been saved thanks to prompt action in the intensive care unit but deep damage has been done.

Terrible damage has been done in particular to the public finances by the collapse of government revenue, as a share of GDP, to levels last seen in the days of Harold Macmillan. There are totally unsustainable borrowing requirements of 13 to 14% of GDP this year and next and the prospect of Government debt levels last seen in war time. So far the public sector, including local government, has been a relatively safe haven for employment and has been able to act as a counter to recession in the private sector. But there will be a severe tightening when (or if) the economy starts to recover.

Local government will not be spared the consequences of the financial crisis.  If past experience is anything to go by, Central Government will be only too eager to pass on the pain in the form of reduced support grants. Even the Government’s, perhaps optimistic, profile for public spending is likely to leave local government facing a 10% cut in central funding, perhaps more, as well as revenue pressures from increased arrears on council tax less opportunity for capital receipts and parking income and spending needs for homeless families, together with a savaging of capital spend. 

The Liberal Democrats are trying to make our opponents spell out how they propose to deal with the fiscal crisis and what are the big items of long term government funding which will need to be cut to save the public services which really matter. If you don’t get clear answers local government should assume the worst.

But the recession has also been an opportunity for local government to act more swiftly and effectively to support local businesses and communities: mobilising commercial rate relief; paying bills on time; localising procurement; running apprenticeship schemes; organising drives on benefit take-up; helping landlords refurbish unused properties for rent; acquiring empty property or land at big discounts from developers; using cash reserves for investment in local industry, promoting local credit unions and social enterprise. These are some of the many initiatives being taken by Lib Dem councils and I am sure others are also being active too. Even with highly constrained revenues, councils can use local knowledge in a way Central Government cannot. Local government cannot stop recession. But it can help insulate communities from the worst of the cycle of boom and bust.

Just as banks are being force to review their business models I hope this crisis will force Government to re-examine the centralised command and control model which has done much to harm and dampen the energies of local communities.

Bath has a good number of cyclists but nowhere near as many as cities such as Amsterdam and Copenhagen. Many people say the hills of Bath work against cycling. However in Trondheim they have developed a really effective answer  VIEW Here.

In Bath myself and Roger Symonds have been trying to get our Council to sign upto Cyclescheme for over two years now. We have met a wall of resistance from the Conservatives but now we are on the verge of getting a scheme implemented. I know of several employees who are just itching to take advanmtage of the scheme and get their new bikes and cycle to work.

Other interesting cycle YouTubes  Here and Here and Here