Richmond.gov.uk/council/
elections_voting_and_registration/
east_sheen_ward_by_election
W
hocanivotefor.co.uk/elections/local.richmond-upon-thames.2019-07-18/richmond-upon-thames-local-election/
Mainstream issues:
Social care-
57% of the council budget does not seem to be enough - default care agencies do not have stars on their Care Quality Commission reports and work for half-hour split shifts. Under another party, the council chose a care agency classed as Dangerous by the Care Quality Commission and the issue wasn't just lack of money - the regime had money for a brass band and a grant to Friends of Barnes Common. Meanwhile,
Curacare who have a star now have an office in East Sheen, and
Jardine Care (who have the Home Instead franchise) have moved-in on the turf as well.
Helping Hands of Richmond town centre have a higher rate of pay which is encouraging and maybe that should be a factor in choosing default homecare providers too.
Education near where children live -
Lack of cash -
When there is no money, invest some. It would be good if the council found a way to borrow cheaply and lend at a higher rate. Meanwhile, some way of explaining council budgets more clearly on the Richmond.gov.uk website would be good for democracy. I'm happy go through details with anyone who is interested, although I don't have a good solution.
Local issues: -
Barnes Common -
Friends of Barnes Common used public money to make the common less safe for people cruising, and increase the chances of mugging by cutting down trees and reducing shadow. If you walk from Rocks Lane car park past the sports ground into the common, you will see tree stumps feet wide with dozens or hundreds of summer rings; these won't grow back quickly. There are piles of wood chippings from cleared bushes, cut by a council contractor lent to the Friends who got a council grant to pay. Richmond LBGT forum were not aware of this at the time, but the Friends had just been on a visit to Friends of Tower Hamlets Cemetery who have a blog post about how to reduce cruising - "put up a sign saying that we know what's going on ... not welcome ... take litter home" was one quote along with the idea of cutting-down cover- "think about lines of sight", the Tower Hamlets web site said. "Most informative", said a blog post from Friends of Barnes Common.
Some method needs to be found to prevent these people getting public money again in their present form, and to counter the argument that a few local people or a bit of litter are more important than a rare cruising ground much used at night. I've put the Friends of Barnes Common's current position at the bottom of this blog post.
I'm happy to go through details with anyone who is interested.
Parking and car clubs during the Barnes Hospital development -
Free parking is rarer by the year as yellow lines and CPZ zones encroach, driving free-parkers to ever fewer spaces that are left. Everything in London is becoming more crowded, and there are very few solutions. Car clubs and their promotion are about the only solution I can think of, for those of us who have trouble affording a car let-alone a car parking permit.
Richmond on Thames Car Club Strategy is a sixteen-page wad of notes from 2006, when there were more council staff to plan and consult and tender, and before P2P car clubs like Drivy Hiyacar and Turo allowed anyone to run a car club car more cheaply than the fleet-owners like Enterprise and Zipcar. At the time there were only two car club bays in the borough, but the number has gradually increased with a planning application and consultation for each one, and each one goes to the clubs that won a council tender - Enterprise and Zipcar. Enterprise charges a subscription even if you don't drive, while Zipcar charges a mileage fee and an hourly fee at the same time. Hiyacar Drivy and Turo hire rates are set by the car owners in competition with each other. There is no subscription, a fixed price per hour and a large amount of free mileage. The agencies themselves are low-budget and sometimes short-lived, with easycar the main agency for a short time until last year when they closed and other agencies like whipcar opening and closing quite quickly.
I suggest that anyone near a controlled parking zone is allowed a
discount on parking permits for P2P car club cars that they own. I live in an area without controlled parking, yet, but I hope those inside the zone get dozens of new car club cars in their areas rather than parking just outside the zone until my own neighbours vote for parking permits.
Some cars are used privately and as hire cars. That's fine - it makes better use of parking space than a zone for each purpose. The discount could be paid one year late, based on evidence from the previous year to show how many times the car was hired-out to people not otherwise insured to drive it, or in practice how many agency trips the car took, and I am sure that the P2P car hire agencies could supply a spreadsheet by number-plate and numbers of hires or hours hired. If a car is hired-out 50 times a year, I suggest that it gets a 100% refund of last years' parking permit, but other people might have better ideas. It's common for hire cars to go-out most weekends in summer but maybe there is some subtlety about trying to clear car parking space on weekday mornings,
 |
no list of locally active car clubs attachedsuch as P2P car hire like Hiyacar Drivy or Turo
or fleet-owned car clubs like Co-Wheels or Ubeeqo
no list of local car hire services attached
no list of local bike hire services attached
maybe a link to a council web page is the answer
if someone can update it with new P2P schemes which
change often - maybe a wiki page?
|
I suggest that the sign posts saying "car club permit holders only" on car club bays are changed to list all car clubs and cycle hire schemes known to operate nearby, starting with the one like Zipcar that's allocated the space. That could lead to greater use of car clubs and more parking space. In fact I have started doing that already, but I am a bit biased towards the car club that rents-out my own car, so a more neutral scheme would be better.
I'm happy to go through details with anyone who is interested.
Hammersmith Bridge closed while waiting for TFL funding over £40m -
There is a non-Richmond, cross-party issue and a part-Richmond cross-party issue.
(1) why have assembly members if they don't have a veto over the mayor's grand plans?
(2) why £40+ million?
The non-Richmond issue is democracy at the Greater London Assembly, which is a bit like democracy at the European Parliament: assembly members have no veto over the mayor's grand designs for millennium domes or demolishing factories for Olympic sports days or cycle superhighways or London Fashion Week which shows Chinese fashion or even the mayor's backing for a third runway at Heathrow.. I like cycle superhighways but the crunch comes when there is no money to mend a bridge but a similar budget can be spent on cycle lanes. We need assembly members who will protest or walk-out until the mayor allows them to veto budgets. Otherwise we will get another Millenium Dome or Olympics or London Fashion Week; we will get more plans to knock down factories to increase employment, all justified by careful reports from London Economics, and all of them unjustifiable but it won't matter because they'll go-through anyway.
The part-Richmond issue is why cracks in the far left pillar happened and why they cost over £40m to fix. A meeting was called for Richmond residents to talk to TFL face to face. It was so packed that a second meeting had to follow straight away. So face-to-face meetings aren't ideal. I suggest some kind of software that can assemble all questions on a similar theme like "can there be another bridge built next to the old one?" and the reply like "we can't find space on the river bank"; "can this bridge be stored in case someone wants it while a bigger one is built?" and a reply like "the chains go a long way under the banks so it's hard to re-create in another place".
My own question to TFL would be whether aluminium could be poured into the pillars to make them solid and fill any cracks, and whether shock absorbents could be put under the deck and on top of the pillars so that sharp jolts of stress are averaged-out before they crack more pillars. I think I saw some online consultation software that allows loads of people to put points of view, which could be better than a crowded face to face meeting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The candidates on the link are
https://www.richmondandtwickenhamtimes.co.uk/news/17749443.meet-east-sheen-by-election-hopefuls-want-represent-area/
Julia Cambridge
CAMBRIDGE
Julia
53A Sheen Lane, East
Sheen, SW14 8AB
Liberal Democrats
trlibdems.org.uk/east_sheen_ward
Margaret Edward
EDWARD
Helen Margaret
17 Baronsmead Road,
London, SW13 9RR
The Conservative Party
richmondboroughconservatives.org.uk/east-sheen-ward
Giles Oakley
OAKLEY
Giles
22 Coval Road, London,
SW14 7RL
Labour Party
https://www.richmondparklabour.org.uk/latest-news/2019/06/25/labour-selects-giles-oakley-to-contest-east-sheen-by-election/
Trixie Rawlinson
RAWLINSON
Trixie
(Address in Richmond upon
Thames)
Women`s Equality Party
https://www.facebook.com/WEPRichmond/
I'll send a copy of this to each candidate although I can quite see why the runner-up candidates wouldn't want to do hours of work reading it and I don't expect them to reply. I don't know if the main candidate(s) give it a read and I hope to get a chance to meet one of them - maybe after the election.
I'm happy to change the postal address for a web page or add one.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friends of Barnes Common current position 26 May 2019
Dear Mr Robertson,
Thank you for your message.
You are of course more than welcome to attend any public meetings and to ask whatever questions you wish.
FoBC works closely with Richmond Council, and has met with Council officers, the police and with the local LGBT group to ensure that there is no prejudice against any individuals or groups of visitors to Barnes Common, while seeking to discourage and hopefully ensure there is no offensive behaviour on the Common, for the benefit of all users of the common and as accepted by the LGBT group.
FoBC works in partnership with Richmond Council to deliver the agreed management plan for the Common, which is aimed primarily at conservation of this Local Nature Reserve but also at ensuring that the Common remains as clean and safe as is reasonably possible.
The conservation work we do is consistent across all areas of the common: it includes thinning of the understorey and creation of glades in the woodland areas to provide more diverse ground-cover for the benefit of invertebrates, small mammals and birds; the creation of pathways to reduce footfall and eutrophication by dogs on sensitive and rare lowland acid grassland areas; control of scrub and bracken; removal of non-native and invasive plants; as well as the planting or transplanting of native species.
Changes to the Rocks Lane Car Park were in response to all day and long stay parking which prevented visitors to the Common being able to find any space for short stay visits, which we wish to encourage.
With many thousand people living and working locally, as well as numerous visitors, and with public policies encouraging people to get outdoors and take exercise for their well-being, the pressure on open spaces within our urban environment is increasing dramatically, and a sad part of FoBC's responsibilities is that it is regrettably impossible to please everyone all of the time.
With kind regards and best wishes
Mike Hildesley
Chairman, Friends of Barnes Common
