The good citizens of Brighton and Hove have many bees in bonnets about various aspects of traffic and transport in the city: the 20mph speed limit, exorbitant car park charges, town-centre congestion, lack of a park-and-ride scheme, expensive and underused cycle lanes, high bus fares, parking zones, conflicts for space between cars, cycles and pedestrians, etc, etc, and, crucially for a tourist centre, the alienation of visitors.
Not only does this show how much the general public and local businesses are concerned about these issues, it is clear evidence that the city lacks a coherent and integrated transport, traffic and parking policy. Brighton and Hove seems to be slipping inexorably behind other English towns and cities.
This is not an easy matter, which may explain why successive administrations have failed to tackle it. Fear of upsetting one or other of the conflicting interests is an inevitable political reaction.
So I am proposing an Independent Transport Commission and have posted an epetition on the Brighton and Hove City Council's website, which you can access (and SIGN!) here: http://present.brighton-hove.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=398&RPID=10939932&HPID=10939932
This is what it says:
We the undersigned petition the council to appoint an independent transport commission to apply some bold and imaginative thinking in drawing up a comprehensive, integrated plan for the city's public transport, motorists, cyclists and pedestrians.
The city's traffic, transport and parking problems are tackled, if at all, in piecemeal fashion. The 20mph speed limit, exorbitant car park charges, town-centre congestion, lack of a park-and-ride scheme, expensive and underused cycle lanes, high bus fares, parking zones and, crucially for a tourist centre, the alienation of visitors are all subjects of regular comments and complaints in the press and in other e-petitions.
All of these are symptoms of the lack of a coherent transport, traffic and parking policy.
Successive administrations have failed to tackle the issues together in a bold and creative way. As a result, Brighton and Hove seems to be slipping inexorably behind other English towns and cities.
Effective management of the urban infrastructure is vital to the city’s future prosperity and quality of life. Too long has this been fudged and sidelined. Let’s make this the top priority at the next local elections.
The petition will be considered by Full Council on 30 January 2014.
There are no easy answers and no scheme will be perfect for everyone. If you think this is a Good Idea, please sign. Tell others about it. Tweet and re-tweet. If all those who are unhappy about the various aspects of an unjoined-up policy were themselves to join up and urge the Council to be positive and adventurous we might get somewhere—like, around the city without so many hassles.
TTFN
Showing posts with label Hove. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hove. Show all posts
Monday, 21 October 2013
Friday, 4 May 2007
Almost the end
14:30 Early results, with the winners declared in 19 of the 21 wards, show that the Conservatives are likely to be the largest single party. They have so far won five seats from Labour and one from Brighton & Hove Independents. The Greens have won two from Labour and one from Lib Dem.
Current seats:
Conservative 26
Labour 11
Green 8
Lib Dem 2
Independent 1
In the remaining six seats still to declare, five seats had been held by Labour and one by the Greens. If none of these change hands (a big if), Labour would have 16 and Greens nine. The Conservatives would be two short of an absolute majority. If they win one more, they would gain control through the mayor's casting vote; two more would give absolute power.
However, it is worth noting that although the Conservatives have been winning seats, they have done so with fewer votes. Data are not available to say whether this is the result of lower turnout. However, in the Grumpy Old Voter's ward, the three Conservatives, although re-elected, saw their vote fall by a massive 25 per cent.
Current seats:
Conservative 26
Labour 11
Green 8
Lib Dem 2
Independent 1
In the remaining six seats still to declare, five seats had been held by Labour and one by the Greens. If none of these change hands (a big if), Labour would have 16 and Greens nine. The Conservatives would be two short of an absolute majority. If they win one more, they would gain control through the mayor's casting vote; two more would give absolute power.
However, it is worth noting that although the Conservatives have been winning seats, they have done so with fewer votes. Data are not available to say whether this is the result of lower turnout. However, in the Grumpy Old Voter's ward, the three Conservatives, although re-elected, saw their vote fall by a massive 25 per cent.
Wednesday, 2 May 2007
Polling tomorrow
Days to election: less than one
So what's the verdict? On the basis of attention paid to this voter, not an easy choice.
The Grumpy Old Vote has gone to Labour for some elections past, since at least before the Thatcher disaster. But if the stories of gerrymandering by Labour councillors to get dodgy policies accepted (school admissions, the Frank Gehry development) are even half true, that would not be an appropriate response this time. Besides, ALL governments run out of steam after six or seven years and as my idea for a sabbatical year are not even on the political agenda (remind me to tell you about that), a change has to be as good as a rest.
Above all, with the serious possibility (even probability) of losing control of the council, Labour has not sent me a single election leaflet. So if they don't try to win, they may as well lose. I went to the trouble of looking at the website, which was mostly self-congratulatory about achievements over the past decade. Some of the policies were ones a council of almost any persuasion would have implemented, some are nationally imposed (like free bus passes for 60+s). Mysteriously, a claim is made to have established an 'elected Older People's Council to represent 60+s'. Elected by whom, may I ask? I am 60+ (just, though you'd hardly believe it) and I have never heard of this council. Window-dressing? Cronyism? Pointlessness?
The Conservatives may oppose the Gehry project but they were in favour of the schools policy until the last minute, and their policy about cars is likely to lead to worse transport conditions, rather than better. They are also the imcumbents in this ward, so voting Conservative would not bring about a desirable change.
The Lib Dems haven't bothered with leaflets, probably because they came fourth in the last local elections and so don't stand much chance, despite the city being surrounded by Lib Dem parliamentary constituences. The website's homepage has a link to a City Council Manifesto—dated 12 March 2003.
Surprisingly, the Greens, hoping to double their representation on the council, haven't bothered with leaflets either. Once again, I have looked at their website and read through the 24-page manifesto for this election that is so carefully hidden away there. OK, printing it out for everyone would use up trees but an advertising campaign to draw attention to its presence would have helped. It's very detailed, and much of it makes sense to anyone of a broadly liberal, social-democratic inclination. One policy proposal regarded as long overdue by anyone who has ever looked at the educational map of Brighton is that new educational facilities should be (re-)established in the city centre. Nonetheless, the Greens supported the new schools admissions policy that is guaranteed to increase school-run traffic—a most un-green idea. And the statement that 'Any money that has to be spent on yet another ballot for change is wasted money' (Manifesto, page 3) sounds suspiciously anti-democratic, whatever the context.
And finally, the fifth party: Brighton & Hove Independents. As previously noted, their policies are shared with one or other of the parties, so they could work on an ad hoc basis with any party that can gain control. But with only six candidates for the city's 54 seats and the dead weight of unthinking voter inertia working against them, the chances of making an impact must be slim.
To judge by reports of political activity from friends in other wards, efforts have at best been patchy and sporadic, at worse non-existent. Perhaps politicians don't think the electorate is interested, or maybe that it's not worth making the effort to try to interest them. If so, writing 'none of the above' in big letters across the ballot paper would be an appropriate response. Unfortunately, a lot of people need to think that's worth doing just to shake the system up a little. Thousands of deliberately spoilt ballots would have an impact that abstention by absence doesn't. 'None of the above' is, in fact, the policy of the Protest Vote Party, but they have candidates in only two wards, not including mine. Good luck to them.
I predict that turnout may be marginally higher this time because there have been recent issues of strong and divisive local concern. And I shall be there tomorrow, with my polling card in hand, making my mark for . . . well, let's leave that until tomorrow.
So what's the verdict? On the basis of attention paid to this voter, not an easy choice.
The Grumpy Old Vote has gone to Labour for some elections past, since at least before the Thatcher disaster. But if the stories of gerrymandering by Labour councillors to get dodgy policies accepted (school admissions, the Frank Gehry development) are even half true, that would not be an appropriate response this time. Besides, ALL governments run out of steam after six or seven years and as my idea for a sabbatical year are not even on the political agenda (remind me to tell you about that), a change has to be as good as a rest.
Above all, with the serious possibility (even probability) of losing control of the council, Labour has not sent me a single election leaflet. So if they don't try to win, they may as well lose. I went to the trouble of looking at the website, which was mostly self-congratulatory about achievements over the past decade. Some of the policies were ones a council of almost any persuasion would have implemented, some are nationally imposed (like free bus passes for 60+s). Mysteriously, a claim is made to have established an 'elected Older People's Council to represent 60+s'. Elected by whom, may I ask? I am 60+ (just, though you'd hardly believe it) and I have never heard of this council. Window-dressing? Cronyism? Pointlessness?
The Conservatives may oppose the Gehry project but they were in favour of the schools policy until the last minute, and their policy about cars is likely to lead to worse transport conditions, rather than better. They are also the imcumbents in this ward, so voting Conservative would not bring about a desirable change.
The Lib Dems haven't bothered with leaflets, probably because they came fourth in the last local elections and so don't stand much chance, despite the city being surrounded by Lib Dem parliamentary constituences. The website's homepage has a link to a City Council Manifesto—dated 12 March 2003.
Surprisingly, the Greens, hoping to double their representation on the council, haven't bothered with leaflets either. Once again, I have looked at their website and read through the 24-page manifesto for this election that is so carefully hidden away there. OK, printing it out for everyone would use up trees but an advertising campaign to draw attention to its presence would have helped. It's very detailed, and much of it makes sense to anyone of a broadly liberal, social-democratic inclination. One policy proposal regarded as long overdue by anyone who has ever looked at the educational map of Brighton is that new educational facilities should be (re-)established in the city centre. Nonetheless, the Greens supported the new schools admissions policy that is guaranteed to increase school-run traffic—a most un-green idea. And the statement that 'Any money that has to be spent on yet another ballot for change is wasted money' (Manifesto, page 3) sounds suspiciously anti-democratic, whatever the context.
And finally, the fifth party: Brighton & Hove Independents. As previously noted, their policies are shared with one or other of the parties, so they could work on an ad hoc basis with any party that can gain control. But with only six candidates for the city's 54 seats and the dead weight of unthinking voter inertia working against them, the chances of making an impact must be slim.
To judge by reports of political activity from friends in other wards, efforts have at best been patchy and sporadic, at worse non-existent. Perhaps politicians don't think the electorate is interested, or maybe that it's not worth making the effort to try to interest them. If so, writing 'none of the above' in big letters across the ballot paper would be an appropriate response. Unfortunately, a lot of people need to think that's worth doing just to shake the system up a little. Thousands of deliberately spoilt ballots would have an impact that abstention by absence doesn't. 'None of the above' is, in fact, the policy of the Protest Vote Party, but they have candidates in only two wards, not including mine. Good luck to them.
I predict that turnout may be marginally higher this time because there have been recent issues of strong and divisive local concern. And I shall be there tomorrow, with my polling card in hand, making my mark for . . . well, let's leave that until tomorrow.
Labels:
Brighton,
Conservatives,
education,
Greens,
Hove,
Independents,
Labour,
Liberal Democrats,
local election,
schools
Thursday, 26 April 2007
Into the last week
Days to election: 7
One week from now the polls will be closed and David Dimbleby will be presenting the television results programme that will largely aggregate the whole of the United Kingdom, effectively diminishing the significance of the local nature of the election. For the next seven days, however, the elections will be fought at local level.
Or will they? So far this household has received two Conservative leaflets. And that's it. Nothing from any of the other four parties contesting the ward. No door-step canvassers, no telephone calls, no e-mails, no personal letters from candidates or even from Tony Blair or David Cameron.
There is still time for parties and candidates to try to influence my vote. But I don't think I am being peevish for believing that as far as politicians go, I really don't matter, any more than voters in all but marginal wards and constituencies have mattered for some elections past. Funny then that the only ones to make the effort at communication around here are the incumbents. If they are afraid of losing, the evidence so far is that have little to fear. Unfortunately.
Friends in different wards of the city have told me during the past few days that they have had visits from Conservative, Green, Lib Dem and Labour canvassers (each in a different ward, it should be said). One received a Labour leaflet. Maybe the parties are regarding the outcome in this ward as a foregone conclusion. They shouldn't take so much for granted. Even if they have limited resources for electioneering, they should be making an effort.
Perhaps by not canvassing they are actually hoping to avoid disturbing the air of apathy that they have worked so hard to engender. Then they can be elected by a percentage of the electorate that could sink to single figures. Work it out: one out of five candidates can be elected with 21 per cent of votes in a typical turnout of 30 per cent. That's 6.3 per cent in favour of the winner. Even in the unlikely even of a candidate getting half the votes in a five-way contest barely amounts to 15 per cent support. That is shameful and outrageous.
So here's my dilemma: if candidates can't be bothered to tell me that they exist, still less what their policies might be, should I even consider voting for them? Vote I certainly shall, as I always have. But the degree of resentment I feel towards politicians will go up yet another notch, my trust in politicians and the efficacy of 'democracy' will be eroded still further. Just as, I suspect, it has been for the vast majority of the electorate who probably won't go out and vote next Thursday. We shall have only ourselves to blame. We get the politicians we deserve and as of now I don't think we deserve any of them. We'll still get them.
One week from now the polls will be closed and David Dimbleby will be presenting the television results programme that will largely aggregate the whole of the United Kingdom, effectively diminishing the significance of the local nature of the election. For the next seven days, however, the elections will be fought at local level.
Or will they? So far this household has received two Conservative leaflets. And that's it. Nothing from any of the other four parties contesting the ward. No door-step canvassers, no telephone calls, no e-mails, no personal letters from candidates or even from Tony Blair or David Cameron.
There is still time for parties and candidates to try to influence my vote. But I don't think I am being peevish for believing that as far as politicians go, I really don't matter, any more than voters in all but marginal wards and constituencies have mattered for some elections past. Funny then that the only ones to make the effort at communication around here are the incumbents. If they are afraid of losing, the evidence so far is that have little to fear. Unfortunately.
Friends in different wards of the city have told me during the past few days that they have had visits from Conservative, Green, Lib Dem and Labour canvassers (each in a different ward, it should be said). One received a Labour leaflet. Maybe the parties are regarding the outcome in this ward as a foregone conclusion. They shouldn't take so much for granted. Even if they have limited resources for electioneering, they should be making an effort.
Perhaps by not canvassing they are actually hoping to avoid disturbing the air of apathy that they have worked so hard to engender. Then they can be elected by a percentage of the electorate that could sink to single figures. Work it out: one out of five candidates can be elected with 21 per cent of votes in a typical turnout of 30 per cent. That's 6.3 per cent in favour of the winner. Even in the unlikely even of a candidate getting half the votes in a five-way contest barely amounts to 15 per cent support. That is shameful and outrageous.
So here's my dilemma: if candidates can't be bothered to tell me that they exist, still less what their policies might be, should I even consider voting for them? Vote I certainly shall, as I always have. But the degree of resentment I feel towards politicians will go up yet another notch, my trust in politicians and the efficacy of 'democracy' will be eroded still further. Just as, I suspect, it has been for the vast majority of the electorate who probably won't go out and vote next Thursday. We shall have only ourselves to blame. We get the politicians we deserve and as of now I don't think we deserve any of them. We'll still get them.
Monday, 23 April 2007
What they tell us, 2: The Conservatives take 2
Days to election: 10
The second leaflet arrived today. Four page A4, four-colour. From the Conservatives again. And rather more information this time, effectively making the previous leaflet redundant (and therefore a waste of trees).
Pledges:
On education, the candidates would 'monitor the future growth of the school population and plan accordingly'. An addition secondary school in the city is a possibility.
Leaflet count to date
Conservatives 2, others 0
Canvassing to date
None
The second leaflet arrived today. Four page A4, four-colour. From the Conservatives again. And rather more information this time, effectively making the previous leaflet redundant (and therefore a waste of trees).
Pledges:
- to control council tax through a four-year detailed plan, to protect the elderly, vulnerable and people on low incomes.
- to introduce 'integrated schemes to enhance the local environment' (rather non specific).
- to 're-develop the Brighton Centre, carefully manage the West Pier re-generation, restore the Regency bandstand, ensure Brighton and Hove Albion FC gets a new fit-for-purpose stadium, and introduce a unified box-office for all key venues'.
- to establish a Tree Trust Fund to renew city trees.
- to work with tenants to bring all council housing up to the Decent Homes Standard and encouraging council house ownership.
On education, the candidates would 'monitor the future growth of the school population and plan accordingly'. An addition secondary school in the city is a possibility.
Leaflet count to date
Conservatives 2, others 0
Canvassing to date
None
Labels:
Brighton,
Conservatives,
council tax,
education,
Hove,
local election,
traffic
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)