Gritting update: Council staff were out again last night clearing all primary, secondary and most so called third tier roads plus car parks.

Monday 6th February 2012 08:05 via HootSuiteReplyRetweetFavorite

@medway_council

Medway Council

Before the snow arrived on Saturday night, the council’s gritters were out in full force ensuring primary and secondary roads were covered and would be safe to drive on in spite of the predicted onslaught of wintry weather.

However, there is some dispute as to their final assertion, regarding gritting the council’s car parks:

Would like to thank @medway_council for gritting Riverside Car Park. [/sarcasm]

Saturday 4th February 2012 22:28 via TweetDeckReplyRetweetFavorite

@AlanWCollins

Alan W Collins

As is visible from the photograph above, Riverside car park in Chatham was covered in a blanket of near-undisturbed snow.

This was despite the fact that both the Royal Air Forces Association Club and the Command House were both open and the car park was clearly in use by customers who would clearly wish to return home at the end of the night.

When there were incidents in snow- and ice-covered car parks during the last bout, there were promises aplenty from Medway Council that more would be done next time to ensure that they remained as safe as possible.

Yet, despite plenty of advanced warning of the incoming conditions, these promises were left broken once again.

Riverside car park is one of the most dangerous in Medway because of the steep slip road on which motorists must enter and exit in single file and which emerges on Dock Road blind to traffic coming from the right.

It is hazardous in normal conditions, but in snow and ice it is little short of lethal. It is only by stroke of luck that there were no accidents.

Perhaps next time it snows, Medway Council can ensure that, owing to the dangers, Riverside car park is added to the priority list to ensure the safety of residents and visitors charged until 10pm for the pleasure of using it.

“The EU Commission’s ambitions for a pan-European code of Euro Crimes highlight how Europe should be about co-operation rather than control. We need practical co-operation to fight terrorism, drugs, human trafficking and other cross border crimes – not harmonisation of national criminal laws.

“We do not wish to subordinate UK authorities to a pan-European Public Prosecutor. We do not want to see British police forces subjected to mandatory demands by European police under the European Investigation Order. We have deep concerns about the operation of the European Arrest Warrant for our citizens. We want the UK Supreme Court to have the last word on UK crime and policing, not the European Court of Justice.

“The recent study by Open Europe offers a pragmatic alternative. Britain should exercise its “opt out” from 130 measures under the EU’s crime and policing plan by 2014. The UK would retain the right to opt back in to any specific policies deemed vital on a case-by-case basis. Yet, as British co-operation with Norway after its recent terrorist attacks and our longstanding intelligence relationship with the US shows, we do not have to cede democratic control with close partners in order to co-operate effectively with them.

“We should maintain our national standards of justice and democratic control over crime and policing – but let other nations integrate more closely if they wish.”

“There are a few questions that will need to be answered, though, all related to other positions Cllr O’Brien currently holds. Which of these would he be thinking of retaining, which would be allowed simultaneously, and should he devote all his working time to the new position anyway and give up all others?”

It is an interesting question – and not for the first time has it been on the lips of politicos in Medway. After all, the same was asked of Cllr Rehman Chishti and Mark Reckless when they were elected to Parliament in May 2010 – and of the former when he stood for re-election in Rainham Central last year.

After all, how can an elected representative effectively work for their constituents whilst holding down such a full-time job?

In order to answer that question, one must consider the council in it’s entirety – i.e. all 55 elected members from all four political groups.

Being a councillor is, to be frank, a part-time vocation. It is not, never has been and (for the sake of our Council Tax) I hope never will be anything different. Of course, one must be available sufficiently to meet with concerned residents, and should endeavour to attend all meetings and fully acquaint oneself with all relevant knowledge and information. But being a councillor is not, with the possible exception of portfolio holders and the Mayor, a full-time role.

With this in mind, would one claim that someone who, for example, works as an accountant, for the Environment Agency, in a city consultancy or runs their own business are incapable of serving local residents as their local councillor. After all, they are all full-time jobs held by current members of Medway Council.

Of course, anyone will tell you that such a notion is absurd: local councillors are drawn from all walks in the community for the precise reason that they provide a provide a wonderful mix of experience. Whether they be a lawyer, an accountant, a trade unionist or a retired insurance broker, they all have a different perspective and talent to offer back to the local community.

If Cllr O’Brien does seek the new Police Commissioner role and is ultimately elected, it will be for him to make a judgement on workload as to which positions he should retain and which he should resign.

Being the Police Commissioner and a council portfolio holder would be, in my opinion, too much work for any politician and chairing Community Safety Partnership meetings when you are the person with ultimate responsibility for policing community safety could set an unwelcome precedent.

However, there is nothing, in theory, wrong with continuing to serve on the council for as long as it continues to be both legally permitted and logistically possible.

According to the Messenger, Medway Council’s mobile CCTV enforcement vehicle has been parked by the modern Waterfront Way facility for up to 60 hours a week and, despite an initial amnesty, have issued in excess of 1,000 tickets.

The Labour councillor said “we are not surprised the CCTV car has been working flat-out to raise revenue. A full review should take place, with an option to scrap them if it believed to be in the public interest.”

This from a Labour group which purports to support the vehicles “in principle”.

Regular readers will be aware that I am not the biggest fan of some of the methods the CCTV cars have adopted, but they do have a legitimate value in enforcement against dangerous driving and parking (when they do not mimic the dangerous parking themselves).

However, in this instance I have zero sympathy with any driver who has been fined for such a supremely stupid act.

To be clear: Globe Lane was closed to motorists some time ago, with no suggestion that the new Waterfront Way would be opened as a replacement through route; the previous bus station in the Pentagon has always been closed to motorists; and I am in agreement with Robin Cooper, Director of Regeneration, Community and Culture at Medway Council, who said:

“I would imagine there is no bus station in the country where people are allowed to drive through as if it is an open road and most car drivers fully understand the reasons for this.”

It is extremely dangerous for the general public to drive along a stretch of road reserved for mass loading and unloading of passengers, where there is such a high volume of pedestrians. It would be like opening up Chatham High Street to motorists and waiting to see who came off worse – because it would invariably be the pedestrians!

Mr Cooper added “Since the bus station opened, we widely publicised that people must not drive through the bus station or they will receive a fine and I think it is fair to point out that the vast majority of motorists act sensibly and care about the safety of others.

“We also set up an amnesty for the first four weeks so that those that did mistakenly drive through the bus station received a warning letter asking them not to do so rather than receive a fine.

“But the bus station has been in place for nearly four months now and it is important that those who feel that they can flout regulations and put others at risk realise that they will be fined if they attempt to drive through the bus station.”

The level of stupidity came to light after a civil servant was directed along Waterfront Way by Google Maps and subsequently issued a Freedom of Information request to discover how many people had followed their SAT NAVs like sheep.

Again, I have zero sympathy for any motorist who slavishly follows their SAT NAV regardless – no technological invention (no matter how “smart” it is billed) is designed to be a substitute for good old-fashioned common sense. To twist a popular adage: if your SAT NAV directed you to drive off the edge of a cliff, would you expect your executors to claim compensation for the funeral expenses?

The same civil servant claimed that “drivers obviously need to be educated”. Educated? Said drivers should not not be on the road at all if they cannot follow simple instructions from road signs (of which, incidentally, there are plenty) or understand what, exactly, a bus lane is!

Cllr Osborne subsequently asked on his blog why the CCTV cars were spending so much time at the bus station instead of immediately installing an Automatic Number Plate Recognition camera.

I’m no expert on the internal affairs at Medway Council – or any council, for that matter – but I would imagine that after installing more than adequate signage in the area and working with the police for the first month after the bus station opened to inform drivers that Waterfront Way was for buses and taxis only, no one pacing the corridors of local power could have imagined there would be such a need for a permanent fixture.

It should only have taken a few weeks of the CCTV car parking occasionally by the bus station to act as a sufficient deterrent to educate drivers!

If the CCTV car or any other council initiative is being operated in a questionable manner, I am usually the first to start jumping up and down in protest – it is what has made my blog so popular – but in this instance, it has to be said that it is not the CCTV car acting questionably, but the drivers who have been caught (most of whom would have accepted their guilt and paid the due penalty).

They are guilty of idiocy, placing lives at risk for the sake of their own convenience and deserve whatever fine lands on their doorstep!

The elected role was created by the coalition government after being a key Conservative election pledge to introduce accountability to policing and elections are due to take place on 15 November.

Until now, only the Iraq war veteran Colonel Tim Collins had announced that he wishes to seek the Conservative candidacy for the position – stating his intention to stand at last year’s Conservative Party Conference.

However, Cllr O’Brien will be a formiddable opponent. He has lived in Kent all his life and took on the council community safety portfolio after Cllr Rehman Chishti was elected to parliament in May 2010.

He is also chairman of the Medway Community Safety Partnership.

Cllr O’Brien told the Messenger “I am considering my application. The opportunity’s there and I think it’s an exciting one.

“I feel my experience stands me in good stead.”

Col Collins expressed concern about the role going to a “sunset councillor” – a charge Cllr O’Brien dismissed.

It is not yet clear how many other potential candidates will put their names forward.

The New Homes Bonus is a multi-billion pound programme that rewards communities when they accept more housebuilding in their area. The Bonus includes an extra reward for building new affordable homes, and for getting long-term empty homes back into use.

It was announced on 1 February by Housing Minister Grant Shapps, who also highlighted how the Government’s action to get Britain building again will play a vital and central role in getting the country’s economy on the road to recovery.

Among the range of measures to get the homes the country needs built, the Minister announced that he has already identified enough Government land to build 80,000 homes, and is now working with organisations including the BBC and Royal Mail to find even more unused sites for housebuilding – meaning Ministers are on course to release enough land for 100,000 homes by 2015.

Mr Shapps also announced details of the NewBuy Guarantee scheme to help those aspiring to buy newly-built properties to do so with just a fraction of the deposit that’s normally required and that he is devolving power from Whitehall to Town Halls, ending a long-standing ‘tax on tenants’ in a £19 billion deal enabling councils to keep the rents they collect and invest the money in their homes.

Following the publication of Medway’s grant allocation Mr Reckless said “building on the flagship Housing Strategy, the Government has this week unveiled a range of measures to help first time buyers onto the housing ladder, provide support for millions who have been left languishing on social housing waiting lists and get construction on the move.

“The announcement that, through the New Homes Bonus, Medway Council has been granted £2,317,239 this year to build much-needed housing in the local area is welcome. The New Homes Bonus, which will start being paid in March, is a multi-billion pound programme which rewards communities when they accept more housebuilding in their area and includes extra rewards for building new affordable homes, and for getting long-term empty homes back into use.

“Medway Council, under the leadership of our excellent group of Conservative Councillors, will have ultimate oversight of any proposed building development, not central government. It will be the job of locally elected, and therefore accountable, representatives to decide on the benefits of building new affordable homes versus the human, environmental and economic impact of continuing with Labour’s failed housing policies.

“Labour led Britain into a housing crisis – the number of affordable homes fell, waiting lists almost doubled and first-time buyer numbers collapsed to their lowest level for a generation.

“As I said on Wednesday in reply to Simon Hughes in the House of Commons debate on Welfare Reform, it is not fair that many of my constituents are forced to get up at 6 in the morning to catch a coach to London because they cannot afford to pay the fare for the train, let alone find the rent for a flat in Bermondsey. It is not fair that the taxes of so many hard-working residents in my constituency of Rochester and Strood are supporting people on benefits who live permanently without a job in some of the most expensive accommodation in the country.

“The government is right to tackle the lack of decent homes as a priority while also addressing the huge imbalance in the welfare system which traps people on benefits. I am delighted to welcome the Government’s £2.3m funding for new homes in Medway, which is far more than generous than the grant allocated to our more leafy neighbours such as Sevenoaks and Tunbridge Wells (£645,997 and £597,603 respectively).

“The Government’s action will help local people onto the housing ladder, provide more affordable housing and create local jobs.”

“Here is the message that Britain has sent to those considering setting up business, or locating more staff, in this country. First, we resent those who earn large salaries. Second, we do not care about contractual obligations. Third, there is a court of public opinion to which everyone is accountable and which acts as a national remuneration committee. It sets salaries by holding public hearings on the Today programme and picking an amount by vox pops on the News at Ten.

“Fourth, you may be picked at random to appear in front of this court, never being quite certain when it will prove to be your turn. Fifth, if this should happen to you, the best thing to do is to surrender quickly. Resistance is useless. You will be pilloried until forced to surrender in the end.

“Finally, do not think that surrender will help you. Once the court of public opinion has finished with you, it will come after everyone else in your company. Oh, and welcome to Britain. We hope that you will enjoy the opportunities this country has to offer.

“Why would anyone site their business, and particularly their financial services business, in Britain under these circumstances?”

Notes

1. Editorial, ‘Jumping the Shark’ The Times (London, 31 January 2012) 2

“So now we know: no repatriation, no renegotiation, business as usual. December’s ‘veto’ turns out to be nothing of the kind; at best, it is a partial opt-out. Britain had asked for concessions in return for allowing the other member states to use EU institutions and structures for their fiscal compact. No such concessions were forthcoming, but we have given them permission anyway. The only difference is that, because the deal was done in a separate treaty structure, the PM doesn’t have to put anything through the House of Commons. We had a generational opportunity to improve our relationship with the EU. That opportunity has passed.

“It’s time for the country as a whole to settle the question. This morning, the People’s Pledge announced the most ambitious plan ever for an In/Out plebiscite. It will hold a series of constituency-wide referendums, first in one seat, then in ten, then in a hundred. Every registered voter will get a ballot, the poll will be overseen by the Electoral Reform Society and, in each referendum, People’s Pledge activists will have a major presence on the ground. (See here which constituencies will be in the first tranche).

“I am confident that the campaign will succeed. After today, no one can plausibly claim that it is possible to get powers back from Brussels while remaining within the EU. Obviously, I hope that Britain will vote to come out: that we will leave a cramped and dwindling customs union and rejoin the wider world. But, either way, I promise to accept the verdict with good grace. Stop fretting about the opinion polls, the timing, the parliamentary arithmetic, the coalition. Ask yourself instead whether a referendum is right in principle. Considered thus, it seems not only desirable, but inevitable. The only question is when.”

“Dissent in any debate is a healthy thing but the Liberal Democrats’ eleventh hour intervention over Medway’s bid for city status is a shame.

“What are they trying to achieve by attempting to scupper a bid that previously had all-party support? – (they now deny this). The time to be openly opposing our application was long, long ago, not now the race is pretty much run. Everyone would have respected their point of view, even if they disagreed with it.

“All the points they put in their letter to Nick Clegg could have been made right from the start, yet they seek to damage the bid with the timing of their intervention. That is cynical and treacherous. Point-scoring and political gestures were never part of their modus operandi, but it would appear now they are.

“The Lib Dems have seen their influence wane, which is sad for they have a big part to play in providing a counterweight to the two-party political establishment. Their problem is no one really knows what they stand for any more. And we suspect, neither do they.”

Notes

1. Editorial, ‘Messenger Comment’ Medway Messenger (Strood, 27 January 2012) 22

The Conservative European Parliament member, who recently came second in the election for the Parliament’s President, added his name to a growing list of opponents to the scheme.

Deva, who has been an MEP since 1999 and was previously Member of Parliament for Brentford and Isleworth, visited a meeting of local Conservatives on the Isle of Grain on Sunday where he discussed the issue with Rochester and Strood MP Mark Reckless and Peninsula ward Councillors Phil Filmer, Chris Irvine and Tony Watson.

“The proposal to consult on building a new airport in the region of the Thames Estuary is a complete nonsense,” he said. “If additional capacity is required, the government should be looking to improve existing facilities and infrastructure.

“The government should be doing all it can to protect our natural and unique habitats here in the South East, not wasting time and taxpayers’ money on unnecessary and extravagant schemes.”

Deva also raised concerns about the impact a new airport would have on existing sites – particularly Heathrow, at which over 76,500 people are employed by over 320 companies.

“If this proposal is to succeed, existing traffic at Heathrow will have to be diverted to the new Estuary airport,” he added, “otherwise it will not be sustainable financially with only added and marginal increases in capacity.

“Closure of Heathrow would follow. A folly so great that it is does not bare thinking about.

“The impact which the possible closure of Heathrow could have on the West London economy would be staggering. Heathrow supports hundreds of thousands of jobs and is one of the biggest single-site employers in the UK.

“There will be a considerable amount of anxiety amongst local residents and businesses should the government decide to proceed with this preposterous Thames Estuary airport consultation. I urge the government to think again.”

Cllr Filmer, who was one of the local councillors asked to talk about the issue on Sky News on Sunday, added “we are against an airport being built anywhere in the Thames Estuary.

“We will work hard to persuade the government that such a proposal would cause significant damage to the local environment and is neither a safe, affordable or sensible solution to the country’s future aviation needs.

“A Thames Estuary airport would be bad for Medway and bad for Britain.”