Forum Topics

Warren Farm-going through the motions

The latest edition of “Around Ealing” has been sent to my inbox. It reports that the results of the consultation on Warren Farm have now been published on the council’s website. 1,520 people responded. Around Ealing has quoted Peter Mason: “The results show that the space is valued by many local people in Southall, Hanwell and beyond and that there are a range of different opinions and views on the future of the site.“We can see that that many people want to see the rich nature and biodiversity of the site protected in the future, but we also see calls for new sports facilities from across the community as well.“A whole decade has passed with young people missing the opportunity to play football, cricket and other field sports on the Warren Farm Sports Ground. We need to make sure that the sports players of tomorrow have that chance”However, if you do go to the Ealing website and bother to read the consultation (it’s quite short) it states that only 171 of those respondents thought it should be “rejuvenated as a community sports facility”. Bizarrely, in the consultation there was this question: “What type of sports provision is needed for the Hanwell & Southall areas?”  How curious.Next to the responses to that particular question, the following two points are made:*A swimming pool and a leisure centre are widely requested, however these relate mainly to the closure of Gurnell Leisure Centre. Residents ask for a new provision with swimming and other facilities for the area but not on the grounds of Warren Farm*Many responses refer to preserving Warren Farm as a nature reserve and not utilising the land for sports facilities. Warren Farm is currently actively used for walking, running and relaxation -residents ask to improve the paths and maintain them well.So while the request from the community seems to be for the return of their swimming pool, Peter Mason has decided they really want field sports. Why did they bother?

Terry Freestone ● 1133d10 Comments ● 826d

Twyford Court -- Need your support

Hi FolksWe need your support if you can - need sensible objections and/or harrassment/ skirmishing action of the planning dept for a local planning application to Twyford Court.The matter is urgent - we're in contact with the Planning Officer - she is writing her Officer's Report as we speak and it looks like the proposal will be approved. This is really hard for us to understand, and to accept. So there are only days left - we are fighting to the finish line, marshalling our support and so we turn to you. We need Volume.Twyford Court (W3 9QE) on Twyford Avenue is close to Ealing Common and within the Creffield Conservation Area (CCA). It's a really lovely 1930's long two-storey building which manages to complement & totally fit in with the surrounding Edwardian & late Victorian streetscape. It has long & sleek flowing lines - it makes you smile when you look at it - you could say the designer of this building was talented. Twyford Court is singled out for significant praise in CCA Appraisal of 2007 (see below at the end of this post).It houses 16 decent sized 2-bedroom flats, with a variety of long-term residents - from young families to hard working professionals to older people - one of the residents has just this week given birth to a new baby, many people work from home, some are retired, etc. It has small but very pleasant gardens at front & back which are used extensively by the residents especially in the summer months.The proposal (230905FUL) is to add a third floor above the building to provide 5 one-bed & studio flats.https://pam.ealing.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=RR3VHPJMKHU00&activeTab=summaryIt will raise the height of the existing walls and provide a flat-top roof with balconies & dormers at the front. This will destroy the look of the building and turn it from sleek & harmonious & well-designed into stumpy, out of character & ugly. The word "naff" comes to mind - there are many more clinical decriptions of this heresy in the objections. This is harmful to an Ealing heritage asset.The proposal will significantly overlook the patios & gardens to the rear destroying the existing residents' privacy and will look directly across into the large classroom windows of the Japanese School London. At the front the balconies (where there are currently none within the CCA) will overlook the street and the children passing by every day, as well as into the windows across the street many of which are private bedrooms.There will be living rooms & kitchens above bedrooms below.They are proposing putting bike sheds for 39 bicycles in the rear garden turning a pleasant & much loved garden into a parking lot.There's much more ...If the proposal is approved by planning, once the works start it will be absolute hell for the existing residents. Building works with demolition then tons of banging & hammering, dust & all that goes with such works - will be going on directly above their heads - within inches. Ealing Planning will simply say "this is not a material planning consideration" - but then who at the council will give consideration to the existing residents, to existing residents of London Borough of Ealing? The answer is Nobody - in this way Planning just wash their hands of it, like Pontius Pilate.But what about the baby, the people working from home, the older residents? "Not a material planning consideration" This is a disgrace.You will see there are many objections on the council webpage for this proposal and not a single 'neutral' or 'supports'. Many really good objections covering all the bases. Now what we need is VOLUME. A Tidal Wave!I have nothing against "modern" I'm all for sensible development when it is needed but this is too much - and all for 5 poky 1-bed & studio flats?It makes no sense. But planning will approve it anyway.Unless we raise a stink. People Power - spread the word - get your objections in - call the planning officer.No ranting please - outraged is ok - sensible objections - firm & to the point.And I look foward to inviting you all to the celebration if & when the application is quashed - due to the tidal wave of people-power and their actions.You know that song "I fought the Law and the - Law Won" -- by the Clash?Well if we win we will sing: "We fought the Council and - We Won"Thanks for listening.Now Go Get 'Em. (Please)Steven-----Creffield Conservation Area (CCA) Appraisal -- March 2007 Not a massive document but depsite having a great deal to cover, it still manages to find space to single out Twyford Court with the following comments:-- Twyford Court is a handsome lowrise 1930s set of flats in a toned down Art Deco style. While the designer did not take architectural cues from the surrounding buildings, the quality of the design and respect showed for the surroundings means that it does enhance the area.-- Due to its later vintage and individual style, this building stands out from the rows of Edwardian houses in Creffield. However, it also stands as an example of how such differences in appearance do not necessarily result in a jarring visual effect or a loss of character in the area. This building’s low-rise design and soft tones add to the rich suburban mix.

Steven Pawlyk ● 835d11 Comments ● 826d

Building London's sustainable and inclusive future.

I'm sure we'll all be cock a hoop when we learn about the far reaching decisions made on our behalf and without public consultation. PLENTY of non-public "consultation" though, if you read on.....  Building London's sustainable and inclusive future.London boroughs are set to unveil a list of key infrastructure projects needed to secure "a more prosperous, inclusive, and sustainable" future for the capital.The London Infrastructure Framework will be officially unveiled at UKREiiF 2023 – the UK's real estate investment and infrastructure forum - in Leeds later today.The framework, which has been developed with the boroughs by the economic consultancy Metro Dynamics and through close working with the Greater London Authority and Transport for London, will promote more efficient planning and delivery of infrastructure and enable a more united pan-London voice to support projects in accessing funding.London Councils' Executive Member for London's Future: Business, Economy and Culture, Cllr Elizabeth Campbell, said: "By setting out boroughs' agreed priorities and the exciting range of development opportunities across the capital, the London infrastructure framework will drive investment towards where it will make the most difference."But alongside this new framework, we are also calling for a new devolution deal for the capital to support boroughs' ambitions around growth and infrastructure. Letting boroughs keep more proceeds from locally driven growth would help us secure investment for these strategic projects and bring benefits not only to Londoners but the UK economy as a whole.    "Boroughs are more determined than ever to work with each other and with our partners in City Hall and central government, as well as with private investors. Together we can secure the infrastructure London needs to thrive in the coming years and maximise its contribution to the UK's economic well-being."

Rosco White ● 848d12 Comments ● 845d

Join Our Team: Become a Community Representative at Action West London

Are you passionate about making a difference in your community?Do you believe in empowering people to improve their lives? If so, we have an exciting opportunity that might just be perfect for you! Action West London, a dynamic charity committed to addressing social exclusion, is seeking a Community Representative to join our dedicated Board of Trustees.About Action West LondonAction West London (AWL) is a respected charity that has been serving the local community for over 20 years. Our mission is to help disadvantaged individuals, particularly those facing social and economic exclusion, to change their lives through employment, education, and enterprise. Our work spans several key areas including supporting young people at risk, assisting job seekers, aiding refugees, and providing educational and training opportunities.The RoleAs a Community Representative on our Board of Trustees, you will play a crucial role in guiding the strategic direction of AWL. You will bring your local knowledge, insights, and passion to the table, helping us to make decisions that best serve our community.Your primary responsibilities will include:• Providing a voice for the local community in board meetings• Helping to shape the strategic direction of the charity• Collaborating with other trustees to oversee the charity's governance• Assisting in the development and implementation of AWL's policies and goals• Advocating for AWL within your networksWhat We're Looking ForWe welcome applications from individuals who are committed to our mission and have a deep understanding of the community we serve. You should have:• A strong connection to and understanding of the West London community• A passion for social change and a belief in the power of employment, education, and enterprise to transform lives• Excellent communication skills and a collaborative approach• Integrity, independence, and good judgementPrevious experience in a similar role would be beneficial but is not essential. We are particularly interested in hearing from candidates who can bring diverse perspectives to our board.Why Join UsServing as a trustee for AWL offers the unique opportunity to make a significant impact in your community. You will:• Gain valuable experience in leadership, strategic planning, and charity governance• Have the opportunity to influence the direction of a respected local charity• Work alongside a dedicated team of trustees and staff members• Be at the forefront of effecting social change in West LondonApply TodayJoin us in making a difference. If you believe in the power of community action and want to be a part of a team that's transforming lives in West London, we want to hear from you!For more information on how to apply, please visit our website at www.actionwestlondon.org.uk or email us at gary.buckley@actionwestlondon.org.ukPlease note, this is a voluntary role. However, reasonable expenses will be covered. The closing date for applications is May 31st.Action West London is committed to diversity and inclusion. We welcome applications from all sections of the community.Together, we can create positive change in West London. Apply today to become a Community Representative on our Board of Trustees. We look forward to welcoming you to our team!

Action West London ● 847d0 Comments ● 847d

ZSL Hedgehog Highways planned for West London

A new network of Hedgehog Highways has been planned to help London’s hedgehogs, a mammal that is declining so rapidly it is now classed as Vulnerable to Extinction. To address a major cause of the decline, Ealing Wildlife Group is making CD-sized holes in fences across Hanwell and Pitshanger and plans to extend the project further in the Borough of Ealing. Created with the permission of fence owners, Hedgehog Highways make it easier for hedgehogs to find food and a mate.The initiative is part of a joint project with Zoological Society of London (ZSL) to use cameras to survey existing hedgehog populations, create new hedgehog habitats and educate residents about how they can help the species.ZSL’s London HogWatch Project Manager, Kate Scott-Gatty said:“Our survey shows that gardens and allotments are particularly important habitats for hedgehogs in Ealing and connecting them is critical for their long-term survival in the area.” Ealing Wildlife Group Chair, Sean McCormack said:“We’re delighted with the success of our project’s first phase in Hanwell and now really need help to roll out Hedgehog Highways across the borough. Improving and connecting hedgehog habitats will help lots of other wildlife species and give our Ealing community the chance to discover the value of protecting nature and green spaces.”Ealing Wildlife Group is staffed entirely by volunteers who will use trail cameras to identify existing hedgehog populations that can be connected by Hedgehog Highways. Extra funding will be used to purchase drilling equipment, create new habitats and deliver education campaigns in schools, communities and parks in Acton, Northolt and Southall.To donate, please visit https://www.spacehive.com/build-hedgehog-highways

Lydia I Martin ● 882d5 Comments ● 875d

Unsolved West London Murders.

In March 2023, The commissioner of the Met Police Sir Mark Rowley admitted the force has 'racists, misogynists and homophobes' in its ranks – as Home Secretary Suella Braverman blasted 'serious failings of culture, leadership and standards' at Scotland Yard. On 6th April I sent a lengthy email to Mark Rowley pleading with him to review The Hammersmith Nudes' murders of the 1960's. I told him that I am in contact with adult children and other members of 6 of the murder victims.  I told him that many of the victims' family members are convinced that if the victims were police women, doctors, nurses or solicitors there would have been a review. On April 11 I recieved the following."Dear Mr Milkins,My apologies for the delayed response. I have forwarded this matter to the appropriate team for their review and direct reply to you.Kind regards,*****  ********      *********  | Inspector | Staff Officer to the Commissioner."Today I received a a phone call from New Scotland Yard followed by the following email.Dear Mr Milkins "It was good to speak to you on the phone just now, and as promised, I am emailing to confirm my details. I recognise the huge amount of dedication you have put into your investigations and I am sorry that these terrible murders remain unsolved, despite your efforts.There have been various reviews conducted regarding these cases over the years and I know you were in contact with DC Paul Rogers in 2007, and most recently, DC Adam Bailey in 2020. It remains the case as per DC Bailey’s letter that the links between Harold Jones and the victims are not substantive enough to enable a definitive finding that he was responsible for their deaths. I hope you understand that because Jones died in 1971 and there is no additional material further to what has been looked at in the above reviews, we won’t be reviewing the cases again at this time.Having said that, I know you are determined to continue with your work, and if there is something substantive and probative that you find that you would like to bring to our attention in the future, please do so.I wish you all the best."DC *****   ****** | CSC - Major InquiriesSpecial Casework TeamTHE MUST GO ON. AND IT WILL.

Neil Milkins ● 875d0 Comments ● 875d

Tut tut. Naughty cyclist punches Mayor’s cycling tsar!

I don’t like the Daily Mail but this story has been confirmed by Seb Dance.Cyclist punches Sadiq Khan’s cycling tsar after being challenged for failing to stop at a pedestrian crossing from a floating bus stop. What’s staggering is that only eight percent of cyclists surveyed stop for pedestrians at crossings. Who’d have guessed?https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11903603/Sadiq-Khans-cycling-tsar-punched-face-cyclist.htmlSadiq Khan's cycling tsar was punched in the face by a cyclist after he confronted them for for pedalling through an Amsterdam-style 'floating bus stop' without stopping for pedestrians at a zebra crossingDeputy London mayor for Transport Seb Dance revealed the attack happened while he was on his bike last year, allegedly committed by someone on a hire bike. These floating bus stops, overseen by Mr Khan, see busy cycle lanes wedged between the pavement and a bus stop island and are joined by a zebra crossing.However there have been warnings that cyclists often don't stop at them or even slow down.And Mr Dance, the man responsible for London's cycling, has experienced this first-hand, according to The Telegraph.In a video shared with the outlet, he told blindness campaigners that he was cycling alongside a floating bus stop and there was 'someone like you waiting to cross.''I stopped and two of my fellow cyclists didn’t,' he added. 'I then caught up with them and remonstrated with them, and I was punched in the face for my efforts.' Mr Dance agreed that cyclists not following rules was a 'big problem' and the incident he mentioned was reported to police.A survey of 397 cyclists by the publication looked at how the riders behaved while pedestrians waited at three crossings in central London.It found that only eight per cent (33) of the cyclists gave way to the pedestrians - which is required by the Highway Code - and 91.7 per cent did not.Earlier this week, Mr Khan admitted that more needs to be done when asked about the investigation at Mayor's Question time by Conservative health member Emma Best.He said enforcing of the rules is required rather than just raising awareness, as he revealed a review has been launched by Mr Dance and Tfl.'What we can’t have is a situation where somebody is seriously hurt, or even worse, as a consequence of cyclists not following the Highway Code and running over somebody, so it’s really important we do this before, God forbid, that happens rather than afterwards,' he added.Sarah Gayton, the shared space coordinator at the National Federation of the Blind of the UK, suggested cyclists have number plates and said that Mr Dance's alleged attack highlights the risk the bus stops pose to pedestrians.'But what has Seb done about it since then?' she added, as he stressed the need for building of the bus stop to be halted.Mr Dance insisted he was committed to making London a more inclusive city and communicates with Londoners about road safety and accessibility concerns.

Simon Hayes ● 898d1 Comments ● 897d

SUPREME COURT - Protecting Public Open Spaces - Statutory Trust

Gerald Moran reports that the UK Supreme Court has today ruled in favour of a challenge regarding land which had for years been part of a Public Recreation Ground at Shrewsbury and which the Town Council had sold off in 2017 for intended development. A revised planning application for 15 new dwellings was approved by Shropshire Council in 2018, despite objections from local residents. Dr Day, a local resident, had not known of the sale but was aware of the planning application. He investigated and found that the Town Council had held the land upon Statutory Trust for the public, either under section 164 of the Public Health Act 1875 or section 10 of the Open Spaces Act 1906, but had sold the land without having followed the Local Government Act 1972 prescribed procedure for removing the land from the Statutory Trust. This procedure involves giving some publicity to that proposal and allowing the public to make objections before the Council resolves that the land is no longer required for the purpose, which incidentally happens to be of financial benefit to the Council in facilitating development and/or sale of the land.Dr Day brought judicial review proceedings to challenge the planning permission on the basis that Shropshire Council ought to have taken into account the material consideration that this had been part of the recreation ground held by the Town Council upon public trust for that use and that there had been failure to follow the prescribed procedure for removing the land from the public trust. The High Court judge was inclined to agree but did not exercise discretion to quash the planning permission, supposing that Shropshire Council would anyway still grant planning permission even taking account of the position. The Court of Appeal (incorrectly) considered that the sale meant that the land was no longer subject to the public trust as it was not for the buyer to be concerned about what procedure the town council ought to have followed regarding the sale.The Supreme Court agreed with Dr Day both on the underlying legal question and that the planning permission should be QUASHED as the material consideration had not been taken into consideration. The statutory provision for protection of the buyer did not extend to removing the land from the Public Trust where the prescribed procedure had not been followed.Lady Rose, towards the end of the decision for the Supreme Court, referred to the advice from auditors that the Town Council should put robust procedures in place to ensure that an oversight such as had occurred here is not permitted to recur. On any future sale of its land the council must be able to demonstrate that it has taken sufficient steps to establish the legal status of the land and act in accordance with all relevant legislation prior to sale. It should consider whether it has the power to proceed with any future disposals and, for the sake of good governance, should formally document the powers on which it has relied when making such decisions. Lady Rose considered that it would be all to the good if, as a result of this appeal, other local authorities/parish councils would decide to follow that advice and take stock of how they acquired and now hold the pleasure grounds., public walks and open spaces that they make available to the public to enjoy.Landmark Chambers presentation of issues on their website mentions that local residents had struggled to finance the legal challenge, for instance with sponsored walks and drag nights. It sounds as if there may be a possibility that the Town Council might repurchase the land for public use, although councils rarely have as much money as they would like.1st March 2023.

Victor Mishiku ● 924d5 Comments ● 908d

Substitute "Ealing" for "Croydon"?

Eerily similar?  Read this and weep..........Ealing Council Labour, a VERY safe pair of hands with YOUR money.... 🤣https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11782287/How-Labour-playing-Monopoly-public-money-saddled-Croydon-record-15-tax-hike.htmlHow Labour 'playing Monopoly' with public money saddled Croydon with a record 15% tax hike... As Starmer says only his party can be trusted on the economy, the shameful saga of the council that went bankrupt three times in two yearsCroydon Park Hotel, once a four-star 200-room establishment, to be demolishedCouncil sold hotel to private firm for less than what it paid to purchase it in 2018Residents now face hike in council tax to pay for commercial property mistake Croydon Park Hotel, once a four-star, 200-room establishment but now empty and rundown, is about to be demolished. Rising, phoenix-like, from the dust and rubble will be a gleaming skyscraper of luxury apartments.The development is a coup for international property firm Amro Partners, which could make millions from the transformation of the site in a prime location in the town near the railway station. But it represents a costly embarrassment for the council under Labour.Here is why. The council itself bought Croydon Park, which had seen better days, in 2018 because of potential to build on the land. But, for reasons which will be explained in more detail shortly, the local authority ended up selling the hotel to Amro for even less than its purchase price.Two consequences ensued: one was that the council lost £5 million of taxpayers' money on the deal. The other was that it missed out on an opportunity to make a fortune from the plot, like the new owners undoubtedly will, once the tower block, awaiting final planning approval, is built and the flats sold.The fiasco, and a string of other disastrous forays into the commercial property market, were among the main reasons the authority was plunged into bankruptcy — for the third time in two years — in November 2022 and why Labour lost control of the town hall in the local elections in May after nearly a decade in power.It is also one of the reasons residents discovered they are facing a 15 per cent hike in council tax — the biggest rise in history — to pay for these mistakes, adding almost £235.50 to the average band D bill. To keep afloat, the council has asked for half a billion pounds of debt to be written off, following a £120 milion government bail-out in 2021, which has to be repaid.Croydon Park Hotel, once a four-star, 200-room establishment but now empty and rundown, is about to be demolished. Rising, phoenix-like, from the dust and rubble will be a gleaming skyscraper of luxury apartmentsMore than 24,000 people have already signed an online petition condemning the rise and calling 'for fairer funding for our borough'.The new administration, now led by a directly elected Conservative mayor in which no party has an overall majority, has been left with a toxic legacy of cutbacks to balance the books; libraries, community hubs and retail parks are at risk of being sold. Admittedly, councils of all political stripes have been hit by the pandemic, the flatlining of the economy and government cuts to public spending.Every region of England bar one (the Conservative-led Central Bedfordshire) will increase council tax from April to avoid slashing services. But the crisis which precipitated the financial predicament in Croydon went much deeper and may yet involve the police.The causes are analysed forensically in two highly critical reports — in 2020 and 2022 — by the authority's own auditors, Grant Thornton, which has a statutory duty, in the public interest, to investigate in such circumstances.A third, the most incendiary, report into the internal culture and practices of the council during the Labour years, is about to be published. The Mail has a copy of the initial investigatory report. The title is: 'Collective corporate blindness: how did we get here?' The inquiry, commissioned by the Local Government Association, was carried out by former local authority chief executive Richard Penn.Penn, who interviewed chief officers, cabinet members, trade unionists and other employees, paints a picture of 'organisational dysfunction at the most senior level'.Staff who came from other councils say they were shocked at the way Croydon was run. One likened the town hall to the 'Wild West'.There was a lack of transparency, interviewees claimed, bordering on cover-up . . . proper financial controls were not in place . . . inconvenient evidence, even from the council's own legal department, was sometimes ignored . . . important paperwork was missing . . . failure was rewarded . . . democratic processes were not always followed. Too often those at the top also displayed an 'almost reckless disregard of the potential adverse consequences of risk'.The Croydon Park Hotel, it seems, was just one of the legacies of this culture. In the final paragraph of the 160-page, overarching report, the author asks members of the council to consider referring his report (which draws on evidence from the auditors) to the Metropolitan Police —'for assessment of any further action being warranted'. Brick By Brick has also been at the centre of a separate internal inquiry — commissioned by the previous Labour administration — by Kroll, the corporate investigations firm. The main focus has been the botched refurbishment of Fairfield Halls, an arts and entertainment complex. It was shut between 2016 and 2019 for the revampEither way, the Penn report is a terrible indictment of the standard of local government in some parts of the country.Most, if not all, of the senior staff who presided over the chaos, including Tony Newman, council leader for 6 years, and Jo Negrini, who served as chief executive for four years, have gone.The departure of Negrini, in August 2020 — with a payout of £437,000 — perhaps epitomises why so many people have become disillusioned with politics. The issue was raised by auditors. The council later admitted there were 'significant failings' in the way the award was decided, and while it was lawful, it should never have been made.The committee which made the decision, the authority said in its response, was held in conditions of secrecy. Agenda papers were not sent in advance to members as they normally would have been. The relevant item was misleadingly listed under the heading 'governance matters' to avoid potential leaks — bad publicity, in other words. Proper records were not kept of the discussions and legal advice was not sought on the possible success of any tribunal claims. The payout, which has caused anger locally, should now be 'reviewed', the Penn report says.Jo Negrini, who set up as an independent 'regeneration' specialist after losing her job, has just been made a director of Arup, the renowned global engineering consultancy involved in a number of major projects in London including the Shard and the Aquatics Centre in the 'Olympic Park'.At least one major public contract was awarded to Arup in 2015 during Negrini's time in Croydon to assist in a five-year regeneration programme in the town.She was an 'executive director' of the council at the time and it is not known if she was responsible for awarding the contract to Arup. But, in a quote on the Inside Croydon website, she said of the plan: 'It shows we are ready to turn Croydon into a modern, European city and means investors and developers can have complete confidence in the council's ability to deliver.' She was, it should be stressed, only one of a number of senior managers and councillors responsible for decision making.The strategy for transforming Croydon into a 'commercial, leisure, living, retail and cultural hub' involved entering into the commercial property market. 'Playing Monopoly' is how one opposition councillor put it.Low-interest loans were taken out from the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB), which was part of the Treasury, to pay for the regeneration. It is not uncommon for councils to obtain funds from the PWLB but Croydon has done so on a huge scale.In three years from 2017, Croydon borrowed £545 million. The lion's share, £250 million, went to the council's own in-house property developer, Brick By Brick, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the authority, incorporated to address the housing shortage in the town.Yet, in what would become a familiar pattern at the town hall, the initiative got under way two months before the full council had approved it.Even then, there was insufficient time to discuss or challenge the high-risk policy —which involved Brick By Brick building and selling properties on land owned by the council — because 'guillotine' procedures were introduced to cut the meeting short.The auditors found little evidence that staff at the new firm understood 'the complexity and associated risk' of the job they were doing.Half of the properties were supposed to be for affordable housing through shared ownership. Brick By Brick, which employed more than 40 staff, was not registered as a 'shared ownership provider', which meant potential buyers were unable to obtain mortgages for the properties and, as a result, all sales had to be suspended. It was a humiliating and costly mistake.Jo Negrini, who set up as an independent 'regeneration' specialist after losing her job, has just been made a director of Arup, the renowned global engineering consultancy involved in a number of major projects in London including the Shard and the Aquatics Centre in the 'Olympic Park'Jo Negrini, who set up as an independent 'regeneration' specialist after losing her job, has just been made a director of Arup, the renowned global engineering consultancy involved in a number of major projects in London including the Shard and the Aquatics Centre in the 'Olympic Park' Another almost farcical episode is highlighted in the Penn report. A section 106 agreement is where a developer agrees to provide financial contributions to improve the local infrastructure in return for planning permission.On one occasion, according to a member of staff, a section 106 (for a future development) was left 'sitting on someone's desk at the council for 11 months just waiting to be signed off'.The delay is said to have cost Brick By Brick, and therefore the council, more than £800,000; nearly £1 million that could have been saved gone in circumstances hard to believe. The precise reason is not spelled out, but spiralling building costs is probably the most likely explanation.Brick By Brick was £25.26 million in the red in 2021, which followed a loss of more than £800,000 the previous year. Hundreds of properties are now in the process of being sold off but will not cover the cost of the council's original loan.The bill for the taxpayer? It will run into tens of millions of pounds, a source at the council confirmed.Brick By Brick has also been at the centre of a separate internal inquiry — commissioned by the previous Labour administration — by Kroll, the corporate investigations firm. The main focus has been the botched refurbishment of Fairfield Halls, an arts and entertainment complex. It was shut between 2016 and 2019 for the revamp. But a litany of 'serious financial control and legal failings', auditors said, ended up costing the taxpayer £70 million, more than double the original budget.One of the most serious failings, according to the auditors, was that the project was not put out to competitive tender and Brick By Brick did not have the proven credentials to execute the contract. Kroll is expected to publish its report next month. The company's services have reportedly cost the taxpayer at least £300,000.Croydon Park Hotel is perhaps the most visible symbol of mismanagement. It was acquired by the council for £29.8 million in 2018 as part of the regeneration programme and would 'generate around £1 million revenue' a year, the authority predicted.Auditors said the venture was 'inherently flawed'. It was a prime example of the culture of 'unbridled optimism and an almost reckless disregard for the adverse consequences of risk' that pervaded the Croydon corridors of power.We now know from the Penn report that Croydon Park was bought for a price 'greater than the professional valuation' and sold last year for £5 million less than it was purchased. The hotel had fallen into administration during the pandemic and was costing £600,000 a year to maintain, without any income coming in.Nevertheless, the council was strongly advised against selling by a government-appointed panel, which warned: 'Given the impact of Covid-19 on the hospitality sector, disposing of a hotel in the current climate is not ideal. The council's cabinet will need to consider whether delaying the sale and perhaps finding alternative source of income from the venue in the interim offers the potential for a more favourable outcome overall.'The council was not in a position to heed the advice because of the parlous state of the town hall coffers. So, the council — taxpayers, that is — took a £5 million hit on the sale, and in the process, missed out on potentially making millions from developing the land, which will now go to Amro instead.'Croydon Labour wasted millions playing Monopoly with public money,' said Tory councillor Jason Cummings. Round the corner from the Croydon Park Hotel is Cedar Road. 'Where has all the money gone?' asked one resident. 'They haven't pumped it into services.'Single mum Kerry Kane added: 'The council tax rise is disgusting . . . the roads are awful. Repairs are not being carried out. There are problems with rats.'Tony Newman, the former council leader, quit in October 2020, but continued to serve as a councillor before resigning his seat in March 2021. He made the following statement: 'Everyone who served as a councillor, myself included, truly regrets Croydon's financial crisis, and the constraints it continues to put on public services and families in the borough. But it would be wrong to attribute Croydon's problems just to spending decisions.'Things can go wrong without there being any wrongdoing. Indeed, Croydon has suffered from chronic underfunding for over three decades and the past few years of austerity have been especially tough . . . we were unable to weather it because of years of underfunding and austerity, which left us with very limited financial room for manoeuvre.'He has insisted in the past that there was no wrongdoing on his watch and that he and senior colleagues, who 'acted at all times with honestly and integrity', had been the victims of a 'politically motivated witch-hunt'.Jo Negrini left her post as chief executive three months before her boss. We invited her to comment but she chose not to. But at the time she said: 'This a challenging time for local government and I am leaving with all the structures and the team in place to navigate through this post-Covid period.'Labour inherited a £717 million debt from the Tories, which was manageable, when they came to power in 2014. By the time they left in May last year the debt had more than doubled to £1.6 billion.The council was warned three times by auditors to address the authority's low level of reserves before going bust. Three times the warnings went unheeded.Why are the people of Croydon facing the biggest council tax rise in history? This is why.Additional reporting by Tim Stewart This article has been updated to correct the number of year Tony Newell served as council leader, from 15 to 6

Rosco White ● 931d18 Comments ● 917d

LCC tail wags the council dog!

This week the LCC published a guide about how to coerce councils into doing its bidding: https://lcc.org.uk/news/lccs-pathways-approach-explained/The language used is quite chilling in its passive-aggressive attitude. Anyone doubting that a pressure group representing a very small minority of Londoners isn’t dictating transport policy should put that notion to bed. They are not here just to advise people about how to ride a bike, this is an unaccountable political organisation.Here’s the whole text so people can see what’s really going on:‘This blog explaining LCC’s new ‘pathway’ approach to local group campaigning was originally published in longer form in our ‘London Cyclist’ member’s magazine…Over the last few years London has shifted dramatically on active travel. The delivery of cycling projects and so many other good things, while faltering, has been in the right direction and, at the start of the pandemic, at unprecedented speed. But the results are still far too patchy. So we’ve been thinking hard about how to get each and every borough moving faster and forward. Ultimately, that boils down to the political will to deliver on active travel, climate emissions reductions etc. of the council. But there is a lot borough groups can do to improve the level of political will on these issues a council has.Building on our local election Climate Safe Streets campaign, and work by Dr Megan Sharkey for the University of Westminster, plus that of Chris Kenyon, Cycle Islington, we have distilled down the journey boroughs tend to go on towards becoming a cycling hotspot into a ‘pathway’ of just four stages. These relate directly to the level of political will of the borough council – but it will be the actions of the borough group that help gain political will we’re focusing on.Each move from stage to stage, with the borough group acting to improve the council’s level of political will, might well take time and a lot of effort, but is doable. Some groups may do stage one and two simultaneously, others may leapfrog from one to three. But if we’ve got this right, you should know roughly where your borough currently is and what we have to do next after reading this. And this isn’t a sprint – the journey from stage 1 to 4 is unlikely to be done in less than a couple of years.We’ll increasingly be tailoring our mentoring and information around these key steps, for instance via the soon to arrive ‘Campaigning Resources’ section of the LCC site. This will be a free to use, but sign-in required area of the site where we put all our advice and expertise for campaigners – you’ll be able to access it if you’re working to decarbonise your city’s transport network and make active travel the norm whether you’re in Bromley, Birmingham or Berlin.The first step to a successful local campaigning group is to ensure it’s not just a tiny band of lone voices in the wilderness. Of course, you need a campaign to rally people to (your Climate Safe Streets most immediately achievable, but reasonably high-profile ask is the most obvious starting point). But you will likely need to focus on new members before you fulfil that campaign successfully. So build a campaign to rally people to – then go get those people involved.Where do you advertise your group meetings? What does your social media feed look and feel like? And why should people want to get involved? Make your campaign and meetings lively and welcoming. And reach out not just to cyclists, but to people who’ll agree with your group aims, and build coalitions too.You’re missing a huge audience if you only speak to those who look like you. So talk to everyone and aim to enable anyone from any walk of life to attend meetings (as long as they’re keen on more cycling being a thing, rather than less). ‘Diversity & inclusion’ means being a more inclusive group – that doesn’t put people off attending and indeed goes out of its ways to bring people in. To go further, consider focusing on communities that are impacted most negatively by car dominance – have the worst roads, the worst health outcomes, the lowest access to cycling – often the people in your borough least likely to own cars, and who may well actively benefit from cycling’s affordability. And make sure when someone walks in to a meeting, whatever their walk of life, they’re greeted and gently try to make sure they walk out with someone to talk to or something to do that suits their interests and skills.“When someone is just beginning their campaigning journey, help them reflect on their experiences and skill sets: what can they bring?” Divya Sharma, Cycle Islington‘STAGE 2: ANY WIN AT ALLSo, you’ve the bones of a functional group — you’re warm, you’re welcoming, new people are joining and you’ve got a core campaign that is engaging. Now you need to turn that into a win. You need to be able to point at something in the borough and say ‘we did this — and you can help us win the next thing’.At this point the win won’t likely be miles of high-quality cycle track or half the borough covered in Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs). This isn’t the time for big visions and long delays on action from council or you. Start small and simple and ask for good (enough), now.Try not to get too caught up in holding the council to account over whether it has achieved the DfT’s technical, new cycle infrastructure design guidance and its high funding bar. What you’re looking for is a scheme that either gets lots more people cycling (and ideally a wider range), makes current people cycling far safer, is really good value for money, is a big leap for the council, or is just really cheap, okay-ish and doesn’t make putting in a better scheme later impossible.Obviously, if a scheme won’t achieve any of the things above, you need to oppose it — but even that should be done to maximise your outcome, not just annoy a councillor enough to tune you out. ‘If only you could do X, Y or Z to improve this scheme we could support it’ is useful framing.To get something happening, you’ll mostly need to target the council leader (the cabinet portfolio holder for transport and officers are useful, but far less important). The leader controls the purse strings, sets the agenda and largely says yes or no to schemes. Spend most campaigning time and effort on them. Try and get a meeting — even better, try and get them out for an hour-long, one-on-one bike ride of the best and worst of the borough.Make sure you show some good the council has done: an old modal filter, parklet or a School Street. But, yes, also show them a road no one in their right mind would let a 12-year-old child ride on and explain why and what their role is in doing something about that.If the leader won’t come on a ride, go for a walk, or just keep trying stuff aligned to what appears to make them tick. Whether it’s social justice, fiscal responsibility, healthy kids or the climate, chances are cycling is a win for that. Again, as part of this process, pick your easiest-to-deliver Climate Safe Streets ask and push them on that.A win on anything will make noise about your campaigning with the public, gee up your existing members to get more involved, and give politicians more confidence they can do this stuff and get good results and praise. Which all makes the next step much easier for them.Of course, any win — even if it’s a single modal filter, a parklet, or a School Street — comes with opposition and risks of wobbles or missteps of the politicians. That’s why going through the journey of a scheme or two will not only build confidence for politicians, it’ll also tend to build trust for them in your group, as you act as an expert on weak points in the scheme and champion for the schemes despite their weak points.“There is no path to trust and action if you treat politicians as an enemy” Chris Kenyon, Cycle Islington‘STAGE 3: CRITICAL FRIENDThis is one of the stages on the journey groups struggle with the most. You’ve got your first few wins under your belt, but they’re not miles of gleaming cycle tracks or giant LTNs. Now is the moment to get the council to step up — it is a climate crisis after all!“Listen and understand. Try to be the adult in the room with councillors. Be people councillors can trust and be easy to deal with,” Michael Robinson, Hounslow Cycling CampaignYou’ll need to be confidante, expert external voice, chief cajoler and cheerleader all in one role. The moment a few half-decent schemes come along, grab a pair of pom-poms and go crazy. Because councils even delivering so-so schemes tend to get noisy opposition.Everyone will hate the council suddenly and politicians often buckle under this pressure. And the last thing they need at this moment is to be shot by both sides. In other words, you cannot get to great schemes without a few average ones.Behind the scenes, yes, you may well need to say stuff like ‘this scheme is good, but…’ with a long list of caveats, but you must back it up by saying something like ‘we support this scheme overall because it will get lots more people cycling, but we urge you to consider X, Y, Z urgently’. In public, you’ll need to be less nuanced and more effusive — because you can be sure those opposed to the scheme will be loud and numerous.This is however, the stage when technical expertise is most needed – you’ll need to be able to scrutinise and assess schemes and adept at constructively cajoling councillors and officers to ‘do better’. After the dust has settled from each scheme, you can again point out your expertise, fix the gaps and get the council to learn from mistakes, so it does the next schemes better, bolder, quicker.“When giving critical feedback always start with some praise” Charlie Fernandes, Brent Cycling Campaign‘STAGE 4: FILL IN THE GAPSOnce the campaign to win political will at a cabinet level is over and borough officers are skilled and experienced at delivery, there will still be gaps to fill. Yes, that means gaps in the cycle route network, but importantly also likely in the representativeness of your group.“Reaching our communities is not that difficult. But people may find it hard to trust you. That’s why LCC should make the most of local partnerships and support groups like ours who work with communities in their own language,” Belgizar, Londra Bisiklet KulübüIf all your meetings are in the south of the borough, and car ownership is higher in the north, chances are there’s roads there yet to be tamed. And a whole bunch of potential campaigners out there that never hear from you, who don’t even feel they’re represented by you.Similarly, while we want all borough groups to always be doing outreach (see Stage 1, above), it’s fairly clear that the arrival of really good infrastructure rolling out at pace is the point at which it gets a lot easier to diversify the kind of people who cycle.There are also often huge inequalities in health outcomes between the richest and the poorest in the borough. Often this is due to hostile roads, car dominant environments, pollution levels etc. You should be seeking to focus on the areas with the worst impacts from Stage 1 as part of your work on equality, diversity & inclusion. But when you’re at Stage 4, any remaining gaps will likely be starkly highlightable on this basis.After you fill in geographic and demographic gaps? We’ve yet to work out stage 5 — and it’ll be interesting to see which borough gets there first. But, hey, the Dutch still have cycle campaigners there too!“During a session for children with disabilities, one of the little girls didn’t seem to have any issues at all. It was only at the end when we got off the bikes that it became clear she had cerebral palsy and could hardly walk at all. This is why I want safe streets, why we do what we do,” Mariam Sayed, JoyRiders Britain

Simon Hayes ● 930d0 Comments ● 930d

Bike helmets save lives. No argument.

Dan Walker on his bike crash in Sheffield:‘TV presenter Dan Walker has said wearing a helmet saved his life in a bicycle crash in Sheffield.Mr Walker, 45, said he was hit by a car while cycling on Monday, leaving him "battered and bruised".The Channel 5 presenter, who used to work on BBC Breakfast, was taken to hospital and was "amazed" to have not broken any bones."The helmet I was wearing saved my life today so - if you're on a bike - get one on your head," he tweeted.Mr Walker posted photos from inside a Yorkshire Ambulance Service (YAS) vehicle alongside two members of staff, after the incident on Moore Street in Sheffield city centre on Monday morning.He said he had been "blown away by all the lovely messages" he had received."Very thankful to still be here. I have no memory of anything and just remember coming round on the tarmac with paramedics & police around me," he wrote on Twitter."Smashed my watch & phone, ruined my trousers, my bike is a mess but I'm still here," he added.He said he would be drinking food through a straw following the crash, and thanked the NHS staff for their help during his ordeal.However, he said since posting about the crash he had been lectured by people telling him "bike helmets aren't important"."The emergency services at the scene yesterday told me I probably wouldn't be here if I wasn't wearing one," he added.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-64722710

Simon Hayes ● 932d4 Comments ● 932d

Health risk from Fast Chargers in Public places

To date not one local authority has been able to produce a safety certificate or insurance certificate permitting on street fast chargers.It's not just pacemakers, they can seriously damage Hearing Aids and some older devices as well as electronic chips in Non EV vehicles up to 25ft awayI wonder if Ms. Costigan is aware given her Union role on Heath and safety?  No-one else seems to be including the operators.This is one report of many and in some countries warnings are marked on the pavements.Issue: BCMJ, vol. 63 , No. 3 , April 2021 , Pages 120-121 MDs To BeBy: Caleb A.N. Roda, MDABSTRACT: Patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are susceptible to electromagnetic interference and its potential harmful consequences from a variety of sources. Recent widespread consumer adoption of electric vehicles poses a new source of electromagnetic interference in the daily environment for patients with CIEDs. Current research shows no interference for CIED patients charging electric vehicles at low power; however, the effects of high-powered electric vehicle charging have yet to be experientially tested. Understanding the potential consequences of this powerful technology for patients with CIEDs is necessary to keep them safe while progressing toward a more sustainable future.A look at the potential consequences.A+ A-IntroductionCardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), including pacemakers, implantable cardiac defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization, have become well established standards of care for a variety of tachyarrhythmias, bradyarrhythmias, and in more recent years, heart failure.[1-3] Cardiac implantations have been increasing globally due to improvements in technology, growing medical indications, and an aging population.[4,5] More than 1 million cardiac implants in 61 countries occurred during 2009, a substantial increase over the previous world pacing survey conducted in 2005.[4] CIEDs are known to be susceptible to electromagnetic interface (EMI) from environmental, industrial, and hospital sources.[6-9] The electric current flowing through these sources generates a magnetic field (valid proxy for EMI) that can induce electrical fields in CIED circuitry, leading to pacing inhibition, device reprogramming, and inappropriate shock delivery.[9] Electric vehicles (EVs) have become ubiquitous in the global vehicle market and pose a new potential environmental source of EMI for CIED patients, especially as it pertains to their high-powered charging.[10]Effects of electromagnetic interference on cardiac devicesDuring EV charging, the current flow in the charging cable creates a magnetic field that can potentially induce EMI in nearby devices. It has been experimentally shown that current flowing through an electronic arc welder cable during operation generated a magnetic field strength of 100–130 micro Tesla (µT), and induced inappropriate atrial sensing in a participant with a unipolar sensing pacemaker.[11] Current CIEDs almost exclusively use bipolar leads and have a higher magnetic field threshold of about 300 mT before EMI is apparent.[12,13] Ventricular oversensing is clinically the most relevant problem caused by EMI, which may lead to asystole in the case of pacing inhibition in pacemaker-dependent patients. Device manufacturers have taken many steps to limit EMI on modern CIEDs through shielding, filters, bipolar leads, and components with less ferromagnetic material.[9] Despite these efforts, there remain reports of EMI in the general environment at an incidence of 0.27% per patient per year.[14] As EV charging continues to become more powerful with higher current flow, it is important to test whether charging an EV can generate a magnetic field strong enough to cause EMI in patients with CIEDs.Safety of electronic transportation systemsCurrent research assessing the safety of electrically powered transportation systems for patients with CIEDs shows no measurable interference. Magnetically levitated linear motor cars, trains, trams, and hybrid vehicles have proven to be safe for patients with CIEDs to ride in and or operate.[15-17] More recently, the magnetic fields generated during regular-powered charging of the consumer EVs Volkswagen e-up!, BMW i3, Nissan Leaf, Tesla model 85S, and Tesla model S P90D have been examined on patients with CIEDs.[18,19] The highest magnetic field recorded was 116.5 mT by the Tesla model 85S around the charging cable. In both experiments there were no episodes of over- or undersensing, inappropriate pacing, pacing inhibition, or device reprogramming. Furthermore, Lennerz and colleagues recently published the complete methodological details of their 2018 study, highlighting the wide selection of cardiac devices tested and thus the generalizability of their safety results.[20] Both experiments had a small sample size and were underpowered to detect rare events; nonetheless, CIED patients should feel reassured operating and charging EVs under similar circumstances.High-powered electric vehicle chargingCurrently, EV manufacturers such as Tesla have established a public global network of high-powered charging stations for their vehicles. The “supercharging” offered by Tesla is able to charge their EVs faster using higher current flow. It was shown experimentally that magnetic field strength around the charging cable during Tesla EV charging increased almost proportionally with current flow.[19] Tesla V2 direct current superchargers generate a current flow twelvefold higher than the charging that has been experimentally tested on participants with CIEDs. This creates the potential for generating magnetic fields around the charging cable that exceed the 300 mT shown to cause EMI in unipolar and bipolar CIEDs in vivo.[12,13] Caution is warranted given the gap in knowledge surrounding the effects of high-powered EV charging on CIED function.ConclusionManufacturers of CIEDs are regularly improving their safety and effectiveness; however, these devices are not without risks and will likely continue being susceptible to EMI from a variety of sources. Currently, EV manufacturers offer the capability to charge at much higher powers than previously shown to be safe. More research is needed to elucidate the effects of high-powered EV charging on patients with CIEDs and allow for the continued adoption of more efficient and powerful EVs without sacrificing safety.

Raymond Havelock ● 945d0 Comments ● 945d

Update on energy companies SSE and OVO.

ILLEGAL TRANSFER FROM ENERGY PROVIDER SSE TO OVO.A response given on Trustpilot on 26-1-23  by energy provider SSE regarding my illegal transfer from energy company SSE to energy company OVO which are part of the same company."Hi, Thank you for your recent email, I apologise for the delay in my response.We appreciate you contacting us. When I check your account, it has already been transferred to OVO Energy. As a result, your account has been closed and we no longer have access to it. I suggest you to get in touch with OVO Energy because they are the team that can assist you.Thank you for contacting SSE."John from OVO has informed me that I was tricked by SSE to sign up to OVO with a false promise of a £50 energy credit.And the response given on Trustpilot by OVO. Thanks for getting back to me, Neil.I've checked over your account and I can see you've managed to reach the team. I am sorry that the letter has caused such confusion, but the install would have had to have been with SSE.Thanks,Dave.Both SSE and OVO are continuing to argue that the other party are to blame for the illegal transfer. I have to wait about 7 weeks for SSE and OVO to sort the mess out before the Energy Ombudsman will intervene. Anyone wishing to change energy providers would be wise to check on Trustpilot the company they are thinking of using before deciding. SSE and OVO are having shocking reviews. See part of Which magazine review of OVO below.                                                              "Ovo Energy came near the bottom of the table in 13th place out of 16 energy companies rated by 10,197 members of the public in the annual Which? customer survey. This is a big drop from last year, when it came joint second. It had poor two-star ratings for almost all of the aspects of service we looked at, managing an average three stars for just one - the accuracy of its payments."One dissatisfied customer said: 'It’s impossible to contact them. Online options don’t make it easy to solve problems.'

Neil Milkins ● 952d6 Comments ● 952d

Research: City dwellers in the UK ‘"need more botanical beauty."

Wottasurprise!  As if LBE under Labour give a flying fornication .....A study published today (16 January) to mark Blue Monday – dubbed the most depressing day of the year – reveals that city dwellers feel that a lack of greenery adds to their blues. Research by Mitie’s living wall specialist Biotecture highlights that 66 per cent of people living in urban environments want to see more botanical beauty where they live and that more than 26 per cent are demotivated by the lack of green space, with one in five feeling isolated. Biotecture’s living walls are panels of plants, grown vertically on structures that are either freestanding or attached to walls containing plants that help to clean the air, provide enhanced insulation and shading for buildings, and improve the aesthetics of an area. More than half of the 2,000 people surveyed think there is a lack of investment in urban greening and 43 per cent observe that there is too little space for nature to thrive. As there is limited horizontal space for parks and open areas, 57 per cent of respondents said they wish to see more vertical greenery – such as living walls up the sides of buildings – to make up for the sparsity of ground-level plant life. Others want more trees (43 per cent), flower beds (38 per cent) and grass (36 per cent) – with 78 per cent saying that greenery improves their mental wellbeing. Although 79 per cent of respondents cite the convenience of urban living for work opportunities and social life, 67 per cent would consider moving to a suburb or the countryside to get more out of nature. However, 62 per cent would consider staying in a metropolitan environment if there was more investment in urban greening, citing the key benefits of having cleaner air (47 per cent) and more wildlife (45 per cent). Richard Sabin, managing director of Biotecture said: “Having access to green space shouldn’t just be a bonus when it comes to living in a city, everyone should be able to easily enjoy nature. It’s no surprise people feel demotivated and isolated if they don’t have access to greenery, whether that’s at their place of work, where they live or where they socialize. “But it’s true cities can lack the space, which is why vertical living walls can be a great solution. The countryside has its draws, but it’s easy to see why people love living an urban life. Plants and greenery can make our cities healthier, happier, and more resilient to climate change.” 16 January 2023 Deborah Shrewsbury, The PlannerSOURCE:   https://www.planningportal.co.uk/services/weekly-planning-news/planning-news-19-january-2023#research:-city-dwellers-in-the-uk-'need-more-botanical-beauty'

Rosco White ● 965d0 Comments ● 965d

If U R concerned about Pollution - THIRD Concrete Plant for Horn Lane Goods Rail Yard.

Ealing is "off patch" from Acton I know, but if you have a concern about rising and unnecessary Pollution then please OBJECT to the utterly ridiculous THIRD Concrete Batching Plant in Horn Lane Goods Rail Yard.Local concerned residents and particularly families with young children and/or those suffering any breathing difficulties are invited to OBJECT ASAP to this utterly ridiculous THIRD Concrete Batching Plant to be shoehorned into the already chronically congested and highly polluting Horn Lane Goods Rail Yard.Inspiration for the wording in your Objection can be gleaned from previous Objections lodged against the current two existing polluting Concrete Batching Plants.Please assist in OBJECTING to this wanton further pollution of a residential family area.I thank you.    😁THIRD and Proposed YEOMANS CONCRETE BATCHING PLANT details at:-https://pam.ealing.gov.uk/online-applications/https://pam.ealing.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=RHH84EJMN5800    Installation of a temporary, rail served, mobile ready-mixed concrete batching plant with ancillary infrastructure to serve the High Speed Two development.    Yeoman Aggregates Acton Goods Yard 305 Horn Lane Acton Ealing W3 0BP    Ref. No: 223766FUL | Received: Wed 31 Aug 2022 | Validated: Wed 31 Aug 2022 | Status: Pending ConsiderationThe SECOND and existing QUATTRO CONCRETE PLANT    Construction of a rail served concrete batching plant (CBP), rail served cement storage facility (4no cement / PFA storage silos), workshop, modular office/welfare facilities, aggregate storage bays, substation and other ancillary structures and parking areas to enable use of site for concrete batching, cement storage and distribution, and associated administrative activities (proposals to enable permanent relocation of existing CBP operation, workshop and administrative activities from Quattro site at Park Royal).    Land Forming Part Of Acton Goods Yard 305 Horn Lane Acton W3 0BP    Ref. No: 191885FUL | Received: Fri 26 Apr 2019 | Validated: Mon 22 Jul 2019 | Status: Granted with S106 conditionsThe FIRST and existing HANSON CONCRETE PLANT      P/2013/3475Soft Landscaping  https://pam.ealing.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=ZZZW6JJMTA796&activeTab=summary    Retention of replacement Concrete Batching Plant    Hanson Concretes Horn Lane Goods Yard 305 Horn Lane Acton W3 0BP    Ref. No: P/2013/3475 | Received: Tue 06 Aug 2013 | Validated: Tue 06 Aug 2013 | Status: Conditional ConsentForum Home

Rosco White ● 1060d3 Comments ● 1059d

They're all as bad as each other .......

Mayor breaks silence to say he won’t publish #PennReportPosted on October 8, 2022 by insidecroydonCROYDON IN CRISIS: Part-time Perry took four days to respond to questions over the refusal to publish a controversial report, only to confirm that he is not in charge of the council. By STEVEN DOWNESFour days after he was approached to comment on why Croydon Council has failed to act on any of the recommendations contained in the Penn Report, and part-time Mayor Jason Perry has finally broken his silence.The Conservative Mayor was elected in May on a manifesto that promised to sweep away the malpractice and mismanagement of the previous Labour administration. But nearly six months after taking office, Perry continues to withhold the Penn Report, which was commissioned from the Local Government Association in 2020 to investigate possible wrong-doing in the lead-up to Croydon’s financial collapse.Inside Croydon broke the news on Tuesday that LGA official Richard Penn had recommended getting the borough’s elected councillors to consider calling in the police to investigate possible misconduct in public office, as well as the possibility of trying to recover the £437,000 gold-plated pay-off handed to discredited former chief exec Jo Negrini for breach of contract.For four days, Mayor Perry was silent, ignoring our invitation for him to comment.Then, last night, Perry issued a statement via Twitter. There’s no mention of the Penn Report on the council’s website’s news pages, although they do give over a hunk of bandwidth to claims that Perry is cleaning up the borough (of graffiti, but not civic incompetence).Perry’s belated response to our Penn Report revelations confirms, once again, that he may be in office, but he is not in control.In office, but not in control: the person actually in charge of the council is on the rightPerry has failed to take decisive action and is cowering behind the excuses for non-publication and inaction offered by the council’s current chief exec, Katherine Kerswell. As Inside Croydon predicted before the Mayoral referendum, having a directly elected mayor is just #ABitLessShit.So while The Guardian, Private Eye, the BBC London news website and The Municipal Journal have this week all followed Inside Croydon’s lead, Mayor Perry decided to stay schtum and instead rely on the dubious advice from the same council legal department that was, in some large measure, responsible for getting the borough into its current mess (albeit that the major player in that regard, lawyer Jacqueline Harris-Baker, who is much criticised in the Penn Report, has long since left the organisation).Perry’s statement simply endorsed the policy of the previous administration, claiming concerns over threatened legal action from those named in the Penn Report.What Perry failed to state on Twitter was that he has this week also endorsed the council’s most senior legal official, Monitoring Officer Stephen Lawrence-Orumwense, in issuing legal threats against this website and its editor.Along with the legal threats, Lawrence-Orumwense demanded that we must return our copy of the Penn Report… thus giving yet more credence to the suggestion that the council – now supported by Mayor Perry – is actively seeking to suppress the report.Perry’s tweet states: “Residents and businesses may be aware that a copy of the Penn Report has been leaked. The council and I cannot comment on the contents of the leaked report without risking tax-payer money through legal challenge…”.Which is, of course, supine nonsense. The council never bats an eyelid about hiring expensive lawyers to front-up at all kinds of tribunals when it is contesting claims brought by the ill-served families of autistic children, or when trying to gag sacked whistle-blowers.For the council to be challenged over the Penn Report, the likes of Negrini or Tony Newman would need to be prepared to face the prospect of standing up in court, possibly in front of a jury of 12 ordinary residents, and to claim that their reputation had in some way been damaged by what had been reported.Just consider that thought for a moment.Clearly, Jason Perry has not.Last night, Perry wrote, “This week’s articles on the Penn Report have reminded us all of the sheer level of dysfunction and mismanagement under the previous administration.“Those failures not only bankrupted the council, they have left a lasting legacy of financial and service destruction which we will continue to feel the effects of for years to come. Many of those financial failures have yet to be resolved, for example the potential £70million loss on Croydon Affordable Homes.“That is why I have always been committed to the full publication of the Penn Report…”, the public want actions, Jase, not more empty words, “… once legal and other processes have been completed so as not to risk yet more tax-payer money.“As Mayor, I am committed to resolving these issues and fixing the council’s finances. That will take time and mean difficult decisions to come but I know together as a community we can get our borough back on track.”But Mayor Perry ain’t publishing the Penn Report.So it looks like Inside Croydon will have to do so, in the interests of the people of Croydon.https://insidecroydon.com/2022/10/08/mayor-breaks-silence-to-say-he-wont-publish-pennreport/

Rosco White ● 1065d1 Comments ● 1065d

Parents for Future to hold pop-up kids wind farm to raise awareness of green energy

Parents for Future are fracked off with the government's new energy strategy and hope you are too.Susan O'Leary from Parents for Future - West London commented: "We are dismayed by the Government's response to the energy crisis - fracking and a huge expansion of new oil and gas fields - as parents we want to make it clear that the answer to the energy and cost of living crisis, goes hand in hand with the answer to the climate crisis. There is no logic in handing out oil and gas licenses to the likes of Shell - the fields won't start producing for years - so won't lower our bills, but will instead create massive emissions, and profits for the oil and gas giants."We deserve an energy strategy that does not side with oil companies over the interests of the people in this country. And a strategy that does NOT prioritise profits over the UK's commitment to reducing the devastating climate impacts of its oil and gas sector. We want a safe and just future for our children".Parents will be making these demands across the country on Friday 23 September, marking the Global Climate Strikes that this year focus on #PeopleNotProfit.Join parents in Ealing at Elthorne Park (W7 2LZ) on September 23rd from 3.30-5pm for a pop-up wind farm as part of Parents for Future's campaign to show our MPs and local communities that we have the power in our hands.The event is a fun family friendly after-school event and will include crafting wind turbines for kids, snacks, games and prizes. All ages are welcome.

Susan O'Leary ● 1086d31 Comments ● 1081d

What will the cycling lobby make of this?

Proposal to increase custodial sentences for cyclists who kill pedestrians.Cyclists who kill pedestrians could face tougher sentences under a planned new law for England, Scotland and Wales.The move proposed by Transport Secretary Grant Shapps will close a loophole which means they can only currently be jailed for two years.He said it will "impress on cyclists the real harm they can cause when speed is combined with lack of care".Causing death by dangerous driving carries a maximum sentence of 14 years.Death by careless driving has a maximum sentence of five years.The government launched a review into whether an equivalent offence to causing death by dangerous driving was needed for cyclists in 2017.It followed a case where a cyclist was convicted of the 19th Century offence of "wanton or furious driving".Mr Shapps said a "selfish minority" of cyclists believe they are "immune" to red lights."We need to crack down on this disregard for road safety," he wrote in the Daily Mail."Relatives of victims have waited too long for this straightforward measure."Ministers are said to be seeking a "balance" to "encourage cycling... but at the same time ensure that pedestrians are protected from irresponsible cycling behaviour".Under the proposal, a new law of causing death by dangerous cycling would be added to the Transport Bill due before Parliament in the autumn.The Department for Transport said it was "exploring changes to allow dangerous cyclists to be prosecuted more easily and delivering more continuous and direct cycling routes in towns and cities which are physically separated from pedestrians and motor traffic".

Simon Hayes ● 1132d152 Comments ● 1113d

EALING'S CORRUPT COMPLAINTS SERVICE

The Local Government Ombudsman is “disappointed” in the borough’s handling of complaints. I am disgusted. The problem is rooted in the reluctance of our elected representatives to take an interest in the misconduct of council officers.  It is left to officers to police officers.  The assumption is they will behave with impartiality. The evidence is that senior colleagues collude in cover-up to protect one another and betray the public interest in favour of their own. The trick that has become institutionalised in council practice is to claim the complaint has already been dealt with. When asked to demonstrate where and when, they ignore the request. I and neighbours complained about seven officers in succession. The lie (“already dealt with”) was passed down the line.  “Tell one for the team” is the esprit de corps in Ealing’s top offices. The officers still with the council who, it is alleged, have behaved in this way are Ms Reynolds, Ms Harris, and, in a separate matter, Ms Taylor. Between them, the first two control the complaints procedure so it is impossible to make a formal compaint which will survive their maladministration.  The LGO never names the officers whose behaviour gives rise to complaints. We were paid a sum of money when the LGO found the Council guilty of maladministration in a matter we put to it. Who paid?  We did.  You did. It came from Council Tax.  The offending officers got away without a bad mark against their name.Who is responsible for the present, not-fit-for-purpose complaints system?For one, Mason.   He promised transparency in the Council’s dealings with residents: “Do email me to raise specific issues about the Borough”. I drew the corrupted state of the complaints service with examples to his attention 12.6.21.   Despite three reminders (19.7.21, 18.8.21, 20.9.21), I have not received even the courtesy of an acknowledgement, let alone a reply of substance. Not much interest in the behaviour of senior officers from him. He is happy to turn a blind eye to the complaints against them. I have formed the opinion that Mr Mason is a moral fraud, a man who does not keep his word, who cannot be trusted. I put the matter to Mr Read, the officer responsible for the way the Council engages with the public.    I gave summaries of of a number of complaints. He wrote back : “ I have reviewed the case history of the complaints which you refer to. I do not believe that officers have acted improperly. The complaints process has been followed and exhausted.”  This bland catch-all “acquittal” was mere opinion unsupported by analysis of the behaviour of the officers involved. It was untenable.  I pointed out in the case of Ms Harris that the Council itself had been obliged to apologise for her delay (four months) in dealing with my complaint. (In fact, she never dealt with it at all.) He asked what specific matter we wanted the Council to deal with.  We said the behaviour of Ms Reynolds when she responded to a complaint against a senior colleague. We put it in the form of a questionnaire about Ms Reynolds’ behaviour.  We have waited a fortnight for a response. Give him another week. Then we shall conclude that answering our questions would have led him to the truth about his colleague Reynolds and so he is dodging them.   it would be interesting and useful if readers of Ealing Today would contribute to the Forum their experiences of Ealing Council’s complaints procedure. These could be forwarded to the Minister for Local Government, asking for Ealing’s complaints service to be taken into special measures. The attempt would at least attract attention to Ealing’s corrupted complaints service. Of course, the unacceptable state of the complaints service is only one feature of the corrupt culture of unaccountability that infects Ealing Council. 

Andrew Farmer ● 1136d16 Comments ● 1127d

Unsolved West London Murders.

Are all the links between Abertillery double child killer Harold Jones and other unsolved murders just coincidences?Here are the facts.(1) Just before Jones was released from prison he repeatedly informed the prison authorities that he did not want to lose the desire to kill. That was the same desire that he admitted that he had in 1921 as a 15 year-old boy.(2) The governor of Maidstone prison from where Jones was eventually released stated in a report: "He is callous but would be the last to admit it. Sad as it may seem I can see no hopeful prospect for Jones in the future." The prison chaplain also reported that he felt Jones was a "no-hoper."Professor Mike Berry, (Consultant Clinical Forensic Psychologist.) visited Abertillery and a number of London locations during the filming of Dark Son - The Hunt for a Serial Killer over a 12 month period. His conclusion was that Harold Jones was the Hammersmith killer. (8 unsolved London murders that were the largest unsolved murders in British criminal history.) He stated that he believed after reviewing all the evidence that Jones after leaving prison had killed again and again,(3) Jones had lived 2 streets away from 3 of the 8 women murder victims in Fulham and Hammersmith as well as 50-100 yards away from murder victim Ignac Ulycz in Putney. The police in the 1960's were not aware of Jones' past and he was never a suspect in any of the murders until after 2008.(4) Jones' own daughter has stated that her father would leave her and her mother at home at the times of the killings and book into Rowton House, a  doss-house in Hammersmith whenever her parents would have a row. The daughter stated that she now believes her father would do this in fear that he may kill his wife in temper. Jones' own son-in-law stated that "There's no smoke without fire is there?"(5) One woman prostitute told the police that she had got into a punter's car with a man who showed her a London Metropolitan Police warrant card. She panicked and quickly exited the car. The man offered her some cash. Was the man Harold Jones using his father-in-laws police warrant card. (His father-in-law John Widdows was a retired London Metropolitan police officer.) The woman some time later became the 7th of the 8 murdered women.(6) Harold Jones stored the bodies of Abertillery murder victims Freda Burnell and Florence Little in Abertillery until it was convenient to dispose of their bodies. At least 4 of the Hammersmith victims were stored before being dumped at various London locations.(7) All Hammersmith victims were demure and childlike in stature.(8) Harold Jones had an oral fixation at the time of the Abertillery child murders. It is recorded by his then 13 year-old girlfriend Selina Mortimer that Jones had asked her to spit in his mouth. The Hammersmith killer also had an oral fixation by removing the teeth or dentures of his victims.(9) At least 4 of the Hammersmith victims had been stored (in an electricity sub-station on the Heron Trading Estate Acton) before being dumped at various London locations. Jones' daughter has stated that her father had worked as a sheet metal worker in Acton but wasn't aware of where in Acton. This is something only the police would be able to ascertain.(10) After Harold Jones was jailed for the murder of Florence Little he bragged about his ability to outfox the police during the earlier inquiry into the murder of Freda Burnell. He said: "The arrival of the men from Scotland Yard fascinated me. I had only read of Scotland Yard men before. Now I saw them in the flesh - and I beat them." I am convinced that Harold Jones went to his grave in 1971 knowing that he had beaten them again.I am in contact with adult children of 5 of the 8 Hammersmith murder victims. Learning of the deaths of their mother's has had an incredibly negative impact on them. They all feel cheated that it seems as though the police have no appetite for reviewing the case.I am also in contact with the families of 2 men that have been wrongly named as the killer. (Mungo Ireland and former world light-heavyweight boxer Freddie Mills.) They are also distraught that their fathers' good reputation has not been restored. Freddie Mills' daughter Amanda told me that owing to the stigma regarding her father that she hasn't told her teenage son that his father was a famous world champion boxer.THE SHOW MUST GO ON.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6BnF5FEmvQhttps://www.jarossi.com/the-hunt-for-the-60s-ripper/hunt-for-the-60s-ripper-on-youtube/?fbclid=IwAR0KLDA0Gs8jaaIHQM0MZcbMaZcu1RlMNswmJyiHLZXfp9wP1CwUQZAm_DY

Neil Milkins ● 1171d0 Comments ● 1171d

Planning Application Forms - missing or redacted

On several occasions, neighbours have pointed out the absence of the actual Planning Application Form within the papers filed on the Council's Planning Website.Thus, the identity of the Applicant is uncertain also the Ownership Certificate details are not available, which can be very important where an Applicant incorrectly claims using Ownership Certificate A to be the sole owner of all of the land to which the application relates when, in fact, this is NOT the case.In a recent case in Acton, in Woodhurst Road, a freeholder developer proposed building a structure in part of another long Lessee resident's garden and no Ownership Certificate B was submitted to the Council.  The garden owner did not see any yellow Public Notice outside the property and had not received any separate Notice from the developer as required by law.  The developer's agent having declared in the Application Form submitted to the Council that no one has a Lease of 7 years or more - this, if it were true, would therefore have absolved the Applicant from having to serve an Ownership Certificate B, but in fact, the garden Leasehold owner proved to us and the Council that she possessed a Lease of 142 years!The resident wrote to the Chief Planning Officer, Ms Alex Jackson about this on 19th April 2022 but, as far as I know, she did not receive any response.The Legal Requirement: STATUTORY PLANNING REGISTER - Section 69 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires a local planning authority to keep a statutory planning register which includes information about Applications for planning permission and to make it available for public inspection, as per the text below:(1) The local planning authority must keep a register containing such information as is prescribed as to —(a) applications for planning permission;(8) The register must be kept available for inspection by the public at all reasonable hours.........................Article 40 of The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 also provides that where (as is common) the register is kept in electronic format, then it can be provided to the public on a website – article 40(14).As Acton resident, Gerald Moran (with almost 50 years experience in property law) has pointed out, there does not appear to be any authority for redacting the Application Form mentioning that "on the contrary, the Data Protection Act 2018 at Schedule 11 paragraph 3(1) exempts from the listed provisions (in chapters 2 and 3 of Part 4 of that Act) Statutory Registers kept for public inspection".

Victor Mishiku ● 1202d6 Comments ● 1196d

Voting UKIP in Ealing Common and Greenford Broadway

Our focus in Ealing offers the following policies:• UKIP will provide local council offices in each ward so that residents can meet council officials face-to-face when they need to, which has not been possible since the closure of Perceval House and the possible redevelopment of Ealing Town Hall. We will also upgrade the Council's telephone system to make it more user-friendly,• We will abolish fat-cat pay by introducing a recruitment protocol for senior council positions we call Cheapest Competent Candidate. This requires recruiters to put at least five names on their shortlists and then ask the candidates to bid for the job, thereby creating an open competitive market, appointing the lowest.  Further increases will be kept in line with the average for all staff,• We will rip up all speed bumps, cycle lanes and other traffic restrictions to reduce pollution and frustration as well as increase local economic efficiency,• We will provide free off-street parking for borough residents throughout the borough,• We will support housing associations to provide new affordable housing using cheap loans from the City which we can guarantee,• We will set up a Landlords' Guarantees Agency to offer landlords direct on-time payment of their rent in return for an insurance premium deduction. The Agency will then collect the rent from the tenant using all the powers of the council. Likewise tenants can hold landlords to account through the Agency to ensure that maintenance and other obligations are properly met.• We will work with the DWP to review Universal Credits to iron out delays,• We will work with the DWP to introduce pre-vetting for benefits so that those who need them can receive them immediately on claiming. In particular this will benefit the self-employed who currently have to reclaim from scratch for every gap between contracts.

Julie Carter ● 1247d10 Comments ● 1244d

Divisive, and a form of social exclusion. Another Labour Triumph

... that has gone completely unchallenged by any opposition.  Which just underlines the pitiful state of this country' inept and morally corrupt methods of management.Shaping Ealing.Another leaflet. Bereft of information and contact points.This is clearly open to only those who have an up to date smartphone.It is only open online to those who willingly accept ALL cookies.Read the terms.  These way beyond most online cookie intrusions.There is no offline form of participation.The claim on the flyer is completely contradictory. " We're encouraging ALL residents, businesses and others to get involved"Who, exactly are others?  Lobby groups? Property developers? PR companies, Activist groups all pre briefed on what to input?This needs to be clarified.Just how many council tax paying residents who are not online or in possession of the latest technology are excluded?It's already known that a very significant proportion of residents in most demographic groups are not fully internet and online savvy or have safe access.Cover restrictions revealed to volunteers just how widespread this is. Not that that made any impact with this council who have not really listened at all to any non council volunteer groups except the ones they fund. Who dare not criticise for obvious reasons.How can a local authority that is supposed to uphold democracy and equality engage a survey company that wants complete control and access without choice?Not even Government or security establishments do that.So who exactly is responsible for this and why is their name not anywhere to be found?It is shameful.  Just another form of discrimination and deception.Worst of all is why any respectable opposition party is not asking this and highlighting this abuse and debacle in election campaigns?That is equally shameful.

Raymond Havelock ● 1255d17 Comments ● 1250d

Give my View. Ts&Cs of an undemocratic nature.

This organisation want it all.  There is no simple option to opt out of anything and the terms to do so are ridiculous.How on earth can a Local authority engage such a dodgy organisation?  Undermines completely the credibility of 'listening'pated to save others the trouble.I wonder of Cllr Manro has a comment to make?  Or any councillors of any party come to that?Give My ViewContact usPrivacy policyThis privacy policy contains important information about who we are, and how and why we collect personal information from you. It explains what personal information we collect about you via the Give My View platform (givemyview.com) (the "Site"), why we collect it, how we use it and your rights in relation to it.When we refer to personal information, we mean any information which could directly identify you (such as, your name or e-mail address) as well as information which could indirectly identify you. Information which could indirectly identify you means information which could identify you when combined with other information we hold about you.When we refer to "us", "we" or "our", we mean Built-ID Limited, a company registered in England and Wales (registration number 10311228), and with registered address of Minerva House, Lower Bristol Road, Bath BA2 9ER. Our correspondence address is: Hurst View, Jacobs Well, Surrey, GU4 7QS.Please read this privacy policy carefully. If you have any questions, comments or concerns about any aspect of this policy, please contact us at info@givemyview.com or call +44 (0) 7547 780 640.1. WHAT BASIS DO WE HAVE FOR PROCESSING YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION?We will only process personal information where we have a lawful reason for doing so. The lawful basis for processing personal information by us will be one of the following as set out in section 2 below:the processing is necessary for the pursuit of our legitimate business interests (including that of the delivery and the promotion of our Site or services) so long as this is not overridden by your own rights and interests; orprocessing is necessary for compliance with a legal obligation; orwhere you have given your consent to the processing.2. WHAT PERSONAL INFORMATION DO WE COLLECT AND PROCESS?We collect personal information from you when you access our Site, participate in Give My View polls and surveys or if you contact us. We either collect this personal information from you directly (such as when you participate in a poll or answer a free-text question on our Site) or indirectly (such as your browsing activity on our Site).This section sets out the different ways in which we collect and use personal data from you.2.1. Information we automatically collectCollection:We collect certain information relating to all visitors to our Site (whether they choose to participate in a poll or not). Indirect personal information consists of:information about the device you used to access the Site, such as the internal protocol (IP) address of the device, the browser software, operating system, date and time of access; andinformation on how you use our Site (for example, what pages you looked at).Use:We use the personal information we collect when you visit the Site to:Use: enable you to use the Site (and all of its features);Analytics: analyse how our Site is being used, so that we can constantly improve it; andStatistical purposes: collate anonymous, aggregate statistics on the performance of parts of our Site or member profiles (for example, the number of people answering a poll over a defined period of time).Our reason for using your data in this way:Legitimate interests (for essential cookies): where our use of your personal information is necessary for our legitimate interests or the legitimate interests of a third party (unless there is a good reason to protect your personal information which overrides our legitimate interests).Consent (for non-essential cookies): we collect and use your personal information in this way where you have given us clear consent to do so. Please see our Cookies policy below for more information about how we use Cookies.2.2. When you participate in a Poll on our SiteCollection:We run are a digital consulting business that engages with individuals to collate information and opinions about particular projects, through targeted campaigns. You are able to give you views on projects that relate to, or may affect, you through our Site.When you participate in a poll or survey through our Site, we may ask you for personal information (such as your name, email address and/or postcode) depending on the nature of the project or campaign. We may also ask you other questions that relate specifically to the poll that you participating in. For some polls, you may be able to submit answers without providing your contact information but for others we will require you to enter your contact information if you wish to participate. You will have control and oversight of the personal information that you choose to submit to us at the point you are submitting your responses.The information you provide as part of the Give My View polls and surveys will be shared with our clients. Our clients are organisations that have engaged us to create the poll or survey, and collate and/or analyse the results. Such organisations may include property developers, local councils and other organisations looking to gain insight into public opinion on a project or campaign ("Clients").As part of the services we provide to our Clients, we may also be required to share your personal information their communications agencies. For more information on how we share your personal data, please see the "How will we share your personal data?" at section 3 below.Please note that you can still vote anonymously by choosing not to provide this information, but it is only by creating a profile and providing your name and email address that you can donate points earned by voting to a local charity.If you choose to sign up via Google or another third party network, we will collect certain additional personal information from you (such as an overview of your profile with that third party). If you choose to use a third party to sign up, please consult the relevant third party’s privacy policy for information on how they use and share your data.In some instances, our Clients may request additional information from you as part of their project. Such information is collected in accordance with their own privacy policy.Use:We use the personal information we collect from you when you participate in a poll or survey as follows:Access: to give you access to information about the project relating to the poll;Submit responses: to allow you to participate in the poll by responding to our questions or requests;Communication: to communicate with you about the poll or project or send you information about us or our services that we believe may be of interest to you; andAnalytics: perform analytics (such as trends, sales intelligence, marketing effectiveness uptake and progress) to improve our Site or services;Provide services to our Clients: we will pass your information and poll or survey results to our Clients and other third parties as part of the services we provide to them.We may use your contact information to send you relevant updates by email, text message or phone that we may circulate from time to time, news about events we are organising or participating in, and/or other information about us and the services that we believe may be of interest to you. You can specify your contact preferences by using the options provided on our emails or by emailing info@givemyview.com. We have a legitimate interest in processing your personal information for promotional purposes, which means we do not need your consent to send you promotional communications related to your account. However, where consent is needed, we will ask you for this separately and clearly.We like to keep you posted on everything you need to know about our Site. We usually do this by e-mail. You can choose to stop receiving communications from us at any time by unsubscribing from our e-mails, or by contacting us on info@givemyview.com or +44 (0) 7547 780 640. We may ask you to confirm your marketing preferences if you instruct us to provide further services in the future or if we’re required to do so by law or a restructure of our business.Our reason for using your data in this way:Legitimate interests: where our use of your personal information is necessary for our legitimate interests or the legitimate interests of a third party (unless there is a good reason to protect your personal information which overrides our legitimate interests).2.3. Other uses for your personal informationWe may also use personal information to:assist us in any disputes, claims or investigations; andcomply with our own legal obligations.We will only use your personal information for those purposes where it is necessary to do so, and (in any case) our use of your personal information will continue to be governed by this privacy policy (as well as certain laws and regulations which govern our use of your personal information).2.4. ChildrenOur services are not designed for, or intentionally targeted at, children under the age of 16 year old. We do not intentionally collect or maintain data about anyone under the age of 16.3. HOW WILL WE SHARE YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION?3.1. Sharing your personal data with our ClientsThe Site allows you as an individual to participate in and give your opinions about particular projects, through targeted campaigns. You are able to give you views on projects that relate to, or may affect, you through our Site.When we collect your personal data through polls or surveys, we will share this information with our Clients and their communications agencies as part of the services we provide to them. We may analyse and aggregate the information before sharing this with our Clients and their communications agencies and our Clients may also analyse your information to help shape their project.Our Clients or their communications agency may contact you to invite you to events or exhibitions relating to the project or to ask you for further information relating to the poll (e.g. further details about your opinions or they may ask you to provide a letter of support or otherwise, as determined by them).Our Client engaging the poll will be specified on the Site and linked to the relevant poll. For a list of the Clients we have worked with and may share your personal information with, please contact us at info@built-id.com3.2. Sharing your personal data with our suppliersWe use third party data processors who provide services to us to enable us to run our Site and operate our business. Such third parties cannot do anything with your personal information unless we have instructed them to do so.We may share your personal data with third parties who provide IT services and cloud hosting solutions, such as: Amazon Web Services (cloud services), including (but not limited to) Lambda, CloudFront;Heroku (cloud services); Papertrail (log management); Mandrill (email services); and Mailchimp (marketing automation and email service).3.3. Sharing your personal data with other third partiesWe may also share your personal information with other third parties, including:Communication agencies: in connection with the management of an event, in which case the details will only be used by the third party for that specific purpose;Professional advisors: to enable us to provide our services to you, we may need to share your personal information with our business partners (including professional advisers such as accountants or auditors), external service providers (for support services including accounting, events management, data entry) and/or overseas counsel;Social media sites: third parties approved by you, e.g. social media sites (such as Facebook) where we’ve obtained your consent to share your data in this way; orLegal and regulatory compliance: disclosures required by law or regulation.If a third party is considering whether to invest in our business, or to acquire all (or any part of) of our business and/or assets, we may need to share your personal information with that third party. We will only do so to the extent that it is necessary, and (in any case) our use of your personal information will continue to be governed by this privacy policy (as well as certain laws and regulations which govern our use of your personal information).Some of those third party recipients may be based outside the European Economic Area — for further information including on how we safeguard your personal data when this occurs, see ‘"International Transfers".4. THIRD PARTY WEBSITES AND APPLICATIONSOur Site contains links to other websites and applications which are operated by third parties. These other third party websites may also gather information about you in accordance with their own privacy policies, which are entirely separate. This privacy policy applies only to the personal information that we collect through our Site. For privacy information relating to these other third party websites, please visit their respective privacy policies as applicable.5. INTERNATIONAL TRANSFERSFrom time to time, we may need to transfer your personal information to our business partners, who are located in territories outside of the European Economic Area ("EEA"), including in the USA, in order to provide you with the services required.Such countries do not have the same data protection laws as the UK and EEA. We will, however, ensure the transfer complies with data protection law and all personal information will transferred securely. Our standard practice is to use standard data protection contract clauses that have been approved by the European Commission or, for transfers to the USA, Privacy Shield (as applicable).6. RETENTIONYour personal information is retained by us for only as long as it is necessary for the purposes set out above. We will keep your personal information for as long as required in order to:deliver our services to our Client;respond to any queries, complaints or claims made by you or on your behalf;resolve disputes;to fulfil our legal obligations or meet regulatory requirements.In general, we will retain your information for 12 months after the completion of a project you provided your view on, to allow the relevant third party to analyse project feedback and make improvements to the project.If you wish to delete your personal data from the Site prior to the end of this retention period, you may do so at any point by contacting us at info@givemyview.com.7. YOUR RIGHTS IN RELATION TO YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATIONUnder data protection laws, you have the right to:Access The right to be provided with a copy of your personal information (the right of access)Rectification The right to require us to correct any mistakes in your personal informationTo be forgotten The right to require us to delete your personal information—in certain situationsRestriction of processing The right to require us to restrict processing of your personal information—in certain circumstances, e.g. if you contest the accuracy of the dataData portability The right to receive the personal information you provided to us, in a structured, commonly used and machine-readable format and/or transmit that data to a third party—in certain situationsTo object The right to object:at any time to your personal information being processed for direct marketing (including profiling)in certain other situations to our continued processing of your personal information, e.g. processing carried out for the purpose of our legitimate interests.Not to be subject to automated individual decision making The right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing (including profiling) that produces legal effects concerning you or similarly significantly affects youFor further information on each of those rights, including the circumstances in which they apply, please contact us or see the Guidance from the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) on individuals’ rights under the General Data Protection Regulation, which is available at: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/individual-rights/.If you would like to exercise any of those rights, please:contact us at info@givemyview.com or +44 (0) 7547 780 640;let us have enough information to identify you;let us have proof of your identity; andlet us know what right you want to exercise and the information to which your request relates.8. SECURITYWe use a variety of security measures, including encryption and authentication tools, to maintain the safety and security of your personal information. Your personal information is protected behind secured networks and is only accessible by a limited number of people who have special access rights to such systems and who have a genuine business need to access it. Those processing your personal information will do so only in an authorised manner and are subject to a duty of confidentiality.We also have procedures in place to deal with any suspected data security breach. We will notify you and any applicable regulator of a suspected data security breach where we are legally required to do so.If you want detailed information from Get Safe Online on how to protect your information and your computers and devices against fraud, identity theft, viruses and many other online problems, please visit https://www.getsafeonline.org/. Get Safe Online is supported by HM Government and leading businesses.9. COOKIES9.1. What are Cookies?A cookie is a small file which is placed on your device when you use our Site . Cookies contain information that is transferred to your computer's hard drive (or the hard drive of another relevant device).We use cookies to distinguish you from other users on our website, to tailor your experience to your preferences, and to help us improve the Site.Some of the cookies we use are essential for the Site to operate. If you use your browser settings to block all cookies (including essential cookies), you may not be able to access all or parts of our Site.You can manage any non-essential cookies by clicking on our cookie pop-up. By default, most internet browsers accept cookies, but you can choose to enable or disable some or all cookies via the settings on your internet browser. Most internet browsers also enable you to choose whether you wish to disable all cookies or only third party cookies. For further details, please consult the help menu in your internet browser.You can withdraw your consent for use of non-essential cookies or manage any other cookie preferences by clicking on Manage cookies at the bottom of any page on our Site. It may be necessary to refresh the page for the updated settings to take effect.9.2. What Cookies do we use?We use the following cookies:Strictly necessary cookies. These cookies are required to save your session and to carry out activities that are strictly necessary for the operation of the Site. These cookies are session cookies, which means they’re temporary and will expire when you close your browser.Functionality cookies. These cookies are used to recognise you when you return to the Site. They enable us to personalise our content for you, greet you by name and remember your preferences.Third Party cookies. We use third party cookies on the Site to perform other functions such as analytics and advertising (as set out below).You have the right to opt out of third-party cookies by removing your consent through our Site.Cookie Name Purpose Essential or Non-EssentialBID-Authorization Application session cookie Allows your to securely access the Site, including the polls, and submit responses. This is an essential cookie so we are not required to request your consent before placing this cookie.Google Analytics _ga, _gid This cookie collects the following information: traffic source, page visits and duration, repeat visitors, browser type and version, browser language, operating system, device type, service provider and screen resolution (if on mobile). If you are logged into a Google account, Google Analytics also provides us with your age range, gender and interests. Non-essential third party cookie. We will therefore request your consent before placing this cookie.Facebook Tracking _fr, _fbp This is an advertising cookie used to deliver advertising content through Facebook. Non-essential third party cookie. We will therefore request your consent before placing this cookie.9.3 Third party access to CookiesThe cookies we use will only be accessed by us and those third parties named in the table above for the purposes referred to in this cookie policy. Those cookies will not be accessed by any other third party.If you 'share' content from our Site through social media websites (such as Facebook, Google and Twitter), you may be sent cookies from these third-party websites. We don't control the setting of these cookies, and we recommend you check the third-party websites for more information about their cookies and how to manage them.9.4 How to turn off CookiesIf you do not want to accept any cookies, you may be able to change your browser settings so that cookies (including those which are essential to the services requested) are not accepted. If you do this, please be aware that you may lose some of the functionality of our Site.For further information about cookies and how to disable them, please go to the guidance on cookies published by the UK Information Commissioner’s Office available at: www.aboutcookies.org or www.allaboutcookies.org.10. UPDATES TO THIS PRIVACY POLICYThis privacy policy was last updated in March 2020. We keep our privacy notice under regular review to make sure it is up to date and accurate. If we change our privacy policy from time to time, we will post the details of any changes here. We may also take reasonable steps to notify you if such changes affect how your personal data is processed.

Raymond Havelock ● 1250d0 Comments ● 1250d

TfL still manipulating and lying

If TfL were a national government, it would be up there with Russia, China and many despot countries for their constant misleading and use of unsubstantiated propaganda.It may not be as nasty as those places but the methodology remains the same. It would no doubt be unrecognised by the UK and sanctions applied.Then again. our Government is not exactly squeaky clean when it comes to telling the truth or misleading the public.However, it takes constant Freedom of Information requests to glean anything from TfL and their duck and dive approach to responding usually means 2 or three attempts before the answers start to emerge.They know that journalists and those who take the trouble to investigate further have limited time or resources or both and this appeases them.The latest claims on this websites lead story are completely unsubstantiated and based on policy and politically funded research. In other words organisations that will produce a report that vindicates what their paymasters policy requires.To take one example : To date there are no clear and definitive causes of Dementia. Whilst Alzheimers is now the generic word, Dementia is a range of diseases of which Alzheimers is one.It is as common in rural areas as it is in dense urban areas - as is Asthma. I have family who suffer both and live in a very rural part of England and one in Eire. Fact is, after decades of research,fund raising the causes are still not understood. It is so random in so many cases.TfLs claims about Hospital admissions are also unfounded. it is modelled propaganda. They have omitted the sources again and again.  B*******t baffles Brains and it seems it works.Our politicians are too lazy or afraid to do the hard work of proper fact finding and force TfL to be open and honest rather than sly and deceptive.The huge waste of money on the ULEZ which with diminishing non compliant vehicles already way below the figure TfL based the justification on in the first place - again by not even being honest to themselves but keen to please their political masters, could have made safer road surfaces and better general improvements London wide for all road users and provide a fully funded mandatory training and proficiency scheme to be reinstated for Cyclists and other non car users.It was the LCC that set this up in the first place and it ended with the demise of the GLC.

Raymond Havelock ● 1352d124 Comments ● 1311d

Complaints procedure rewritten to protect the CEO.

Complaints procedure rewritten to protect the CEO.The complaints procedure used to have 3 stages.  It has been reduced to 2.  It will no longer have a stage-three input from the CEO.  Instead, it will go straight to the local Government Ombudsman.  Nice for the CEO.  If the LGO finds the Council guilty of maladministration, the CEO will no longer be implicated.The CEO should be held accountable for anything and everything those under him do.  He is paid enough to take responsibility for their behaviour.   The change was discussed at the cabinet meeting of 10.11.21.  The rationale for trimming away the third stage was that it was found that the stage-three review did not change the outcome for the complainant. The same might be said of stage two, because the officers who review the response of the stage-one respondent (their colleague) act not with the honesty and impartiality required of a public servant but as “counsel for the defence” for their colleague.   The usual trick, even at stage one, is to claim the matter has already been dealt with. At the cabinet meeting, there was no discussion of whether the CEO should not still play a part in the process by being the second-stage respondent. So, now the CEO has no responsibility to investigate the behaviour of the senior officers below him, which one would have thought was one of his functions. The author of the proposal put before the Cabinet for this change was Alison Reynolds,who has control of the complaints procedure.  This is the Alison Reynolds who when asked to investigate a complaint against a senior colleague wrote “I have concluded that all of the matters raised as part of this case have now been addressed”  - even though she was the first person to address them  - and handn’t addressed them and didn’t! The complaints procedure is corrupted by senior officers who protect their senior colleagues by this quick-fix comment (“already dealt with”).  It has become institutionalised by repetition.

Andrew Farmer ● 1323d1 Comments ● 1323d

council fined by LGO for housing and compaints maladministration

Council found guilty of “severe maladministration” in respect of housing and its complaints procedure. No news to me and my neighbours.  We recall the horrors of the time the Council was operating a hostel at 354-6 Uxbridge Road - contrary to planning regulations.  More recently council officer Mark Wiltshire relicensed a landlord as “a fit and proper person” to hold a licence on a large HMO when he knew he had been housing tenants in filth and fire hazard (walls damp and mouldy, smoke alarm taped over, fire escape route blocked with old furniture and rubbish), and knew he was failing to prevent his tenants causing antisocial nuisance in the neighbourhood.   Shocking.  More shocking:  Wiltshire still has his job.  The complaints procedure?  We complained about him. It was dealt with by Helen Harris, Director legal and Democratic Services.  Required to respond within twenty days, she procrastinated for nearly five months!  The Council apologised for her “unacceptable” behaviour.  The complaint passed to officer Alison Reynolds. Before we had had a chance to request escalation, she had already refused to escalate the complaint. “I would like to advise you that the Council will no longer enter into any more correspondence with you or your associates”.  It was our right to request escalation. She corrupted due process, Shocking.  More shocking. She still has her job. History has repeated itself and will go on doing so under Mason.  He asked residents to email him with concerns about the borough.  I emailed him about this.  He ignored the email.  

Andrew Farmer ● 1337d1 Comments ● 1331d

Public Open Space Covenants & Stipulations on Council-held land

In the neighbouring London Borough of Hillingdon (our Prime Minister - The Right Hon. Boris Johnson's constituency), the Leader of the Labour Group of Councillors made the following Motion at Cabinet on 13th January 2022."That this Council believes that restrictive covenants on public & communal land plays an important role in ensuring that the value and enjoyment of the land is, and continues to be, preserved. Restrictive covenants enhance and protect our borough for our residents’ benefit and that of future generations.This Council, therefore, believes that it should set the example and do all within its power to uphold restrictive covenants especially on council land.This Council, therefore, calls on the Cabinet to abolish their current plans to remove the restrictive covenant in Yiewsley in order to develop on the recreation ground and library site.This Council calls on the Cabinet to enter into dialogue with local residents to devise alternative options for the use of the land in Yiewsley that complies with the restrictive covenants put in place to preserve the enjoyment and benefit for Hillingdon residents.Furthermore, this Council commits to uphold restrictive covenants across the borough for the benefit of residents."The above declaration in the Motion is reminiscent of the admirable Manifesto Pledge made by Cllr. John Cudmore, former Acton Councillor and the Leader of the Labour Group in Ealing at the time of his party's successful efforts to win the administration control of Ealing Council in May 1994 at the local 4-yearly election promising that the Council would respect the views of residents and protect the borough's conservation areas and green spaces from backland developments, etc.Victor Mishiku  16/1/2022"The Covenant Movement" Ealing.

Victor Mishiku ● 1334d2 Comments ● 1331d

The continuing tragedy of Gunnersbury Park

Neglected by two boroughs who could not manage to tie a shoe-lace together for decades, handed over in an appallingly formulated way to a Cop-out CIC, then packed out with Cronies of like mindsets and connections, a TfL approach to funding where even a tuft of grass is fiscally overpricedSome good stuff, but from a a lot of grant funding which is unaccounted for and overseen with sort of knowledge that would make an IKEA shelf priced at £2500 plus fitting seem "very reasonable". Much core infrastructure for a public park remains as poor as it has been for 25 plus years. A complete contradiction to 'Community Interest Company " and with not even a freedom of information clause - which needless to say this management wriggled out of. Because it's overseers, both Trustees and Councils, deemed it irrelevant.Even a Velcro shoe strap is too challenging for this CIOC who only know how to bully and manipulate with help from their 'friends'Loss of cheap affordable to all public park amenities and replaced by exclusivity with a patronising faux front of inclusivity.Change is welcome, but that will only be change for the better if ALL the existing league of cronies and those at the trough are not involved in any form.  A completely new broom of more open and honest management put in place properly answerable to the local people of Ealing, Acton and Brentford who seem to be considered as irrelevant unless they can afford it. Community groups must be on the board and as trustees, not just selected politicians and 'preferred' individuals.Local people, not council officers with close connections, or politicians who seem to have failed with Gunnersbury time and time again, need to be far more in control of a Park that was purchased at a knock down price on the premise that it was for the well being of All the local people of Ealing Acton Brentford and Chiswick.Will this be any better? With how things are carried out in our name?I doubt it. It seems more like another move to making it a pay to enter venue like Syon or Kew and not what it is supposed to be, a Public park owned in trust by two boroughs for it's inhabitants

Raymond Havelock ● 1349d1 Comments ● 1349d

Freedom of Information Refused by Ealing

I have strong reason to feel that the courts are partisan and are assisting Ealing Council in getting their way in court cases . ( at least with pricate individuals ) so i asked Ealing if they could provide me with some simple data FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 - INFORMATION REQUESTThank you for your Freedom of Information request received by the Council on 13th December 2021.Your request:• What percentage of court cases Ealing win and lose and where these court cases areheld?• The names of the deputy district judges and judges who hear your cases• I would also like to know how many court cases you instigate and how many courtcases are instigated against you.Your request has been assessed and the following information is provided in response:This information is not recorded. It would take longer than 18 hours to answer this request, due to theneed to peruse hundreds of files from many different council departments. Note that it is not just thelegal team that deal with legal proceedings brought against the council; many departments (eg.Insurance, housing, planning) deal with many cases independently. Some non-legal teams also onoccasion bring proceedings on behalf of the council.the reason for my request was to see if Ealing was given special treatment and if certain judges were given the cases related to the borough it seems a reasonable FOI request to me because my own experience suggests networking between Ealing Council and the judges who fail to act with impartiality and have ethnic and political links with the Councils senior leadership

P Taylor ● 1359d11 Comments ● 1351d

Is this ok?

I recently had a remote hearing at Brentford County court , Ealing Council won £1600 based upon their claim taht there is no law that requires the council to respond to a local resident . this means that according to the judge absolutely NOBODY has any actual right to a response regardles sof the topic . i regard this as a denial of basic justice . after the hearing I went online and discovered that the Judge Michael Shelton was a co religionist of the Councils lawyer and indeed the leader of Ealing Council . I am no legal expert but where there are significant political and religious links I would have thought it would be prudent to avoid any possibility of favouritism. I had emailed the editor of Ealing today but got no reply . Ealing Council have all kinds of stated policies on treating residents with respect that they violate , the new leader Peter Mason ( he probably is) claimed that his administration would be open and transparent and that is absolutely not the case . The council have an exprert legal team and very warm relations with Brentford Court , i have submitted a FOI request to ask what percentage of Ealings court cases are won and lost . in my opinion the small claims court should be a simple straightforward method for average people to get justice but in reality it is a minefield of corruption, legalese, jargon , how the hell can I who brought the case because i have been IGNORED for 6 years be given costs to the wealthy council of £1600 in the SMALL CLAIMS COURT based upon the idea that no law is actually some sort of law and using obscure civil procedure rules . so far a couple of people have been helpful but i am determined not to allow Ealing Council to get away with this and you should help me because the idea that teh council can legally ignore us must be absolutely unacceptable in a so called democracy and that there must be no overt links between the politicians and the judges as was in this case , you are welcome to call me on 07396534522 Paul

P Taylor ● 1363d9 Comments ● 1360d

Sadiq Khan is misusing our money 

Khan is giving £25,000 grants to help people 'decolonise' their street names, part of his million-pound Untold Stories fund, which was “inspired by the BLM protests”. The protests, let us not forget, saw a female police officer injured when one of the defund-the-police activists threw a bottle at her and were inspired by the death of a drug-fuelled armed black burglar who terrorised a woman in her home, yes, good old Georgie Floyd. Renaming a road requires a consultation.   It is a two-sided affair.  Why is Khan, in fairness, not funding those who oppose the renaming?  His obligation is to represent not only people who voted for him but all residents of London.  This is a politically biased and when its detail is examined a racially-discriminatory handout that favours the interest of one section of the community. It was redundant as far as Ealing is concerned.  As soon as Khan first introduced this scheme, Julian Bell was up at dawn, tongue in Khan’s anus, suggesting a specific road-name change, Havelock Road in Southall.  No one there had requested or paid for the change, but the council had heard that people wanted it and so adopted the proposal. The protocol applicable at the time did not permit the name-change so the Council changed it allow it to go ahead. This dishonest stratagem was endorsed by the Cabinet.  Of course. Back to Khan.  This is the man who referred to the “passing” of Sir David Amess as if he died peacefully in his sleep. Nick Price of the Crown Prosecution Service has stated: "We will submit to the court that this murder has a terrorist connection, namely that it had both religious and ideological motivations.”  Which religion would that be?  Is there something embarrassing to Khan in what happened so that he disrespectfully to the memory of David Amess tries to make light of its the horror?  Khan has embarked upon a scheme to undermine our culture and rewrite our history.  Whatever the merits of that, the question is what does he want to replace it with?  One founded on the culture of his ancestral homeland?   I do not want to live in Pakistan-on-Thames.

Andrew Farmer ● 1412d34 Comments ● 1387d

Action against Ealing Council December 7th

i am attempting to get justice against Ealing Council who for 6 years have been ignoring my on topic emails and calls relating to housing issues , the argument that Ealing give is that there is no law that obliges them to respond, how can a council obtain money from local ratepayers without an obligation to reply . do you agree with Ealing council , please note that I am not attempting to locate a missing cat , my emails are about vital housing issues and negligance by the council that have harmed me personally . This matter has been escalated via the official complaints procedures and I had previously been given esacalation reference numbers none of which resulted in any action , My local councillor Anthony Young who is well past retirement age and has out of date details on his landing page also refused to respond fact is that with the exception of bin emptying, street cleaning and parks which at least down my way are well done . i also note a point made by the excellent Andrew Farmer that the promises of new council leader Peter Mason are just empty rhetoric and hot air . there is no point in pretending to make a fresh start after the atrocious Julian Bell and then simply duplicate his policies . anyway if any of you who have experience with Ealing Council would like to asisst me my contact number is 07396534522 and please can you state publicly if you agree that Ealing Council can legally be allowed to ignore the legitimate correspondence of local residents and ratepayers

P Taylor ● 1401d4 Comments ● 1398d

Ealing Independents announces Southall Candidate to compete against Peter Mason.

I have nothing to do with Ealing Independents, just thought folk would like to be aware:-EALING INDEPENDENTS ANNOUNCES SOUTHALL CANDIDATE TO COMPETE AGAINST CURRENT EALING LABOUR AND COUNCIL LEADER PETER MASON IN THE WARD OF SOUTHALL GREEN FOR THE MAY 2022 EALING COUNCIL ELECTIONSDate: 26/10/2021 10:00From: Ealing Independents PRESS RELEASEEALING INDEPENDENTS ANNOUNCES SOUTHALL CANDIDATE TO COMPETE AGAINST CURRENT EALING LABOUR AND COUNCIL LEADER PETER MASON IN THE WARD OF SOUTHALL GREEN FOR THE MAY 2022 EALING COUNCIL ELECTIONSEaling Independents (www.EalingIndependents.com), the grassroots group founded by Ealing resident Leslie Bunder is delighted to announce the first of its many candidates who will be standing for Ealing Independents in the forthcoming May 2022 Ealing elections.These independent candidates will represent their local community and are the first of many to be standing across all towns of Ealing which include Acton, Ealing, Greenford, Hanwell, Northolt, Perivale, and Southall.(Ealing, London, UK – October 26, 2021) – Ealing Independents (www.EalingIndependents.com), the grassroots group standing up for all Ealing residents, is proud to announce that members of the public who wish to improve the lives of their local communities in towns such as Southall are to stand as candidates in their local wards in the May 2022 Ealing elections.These independent candidates, as councillors, will ensure that all Ealing residents and businesses in its seven towns (Acton, Ealing, Greenford, Hanwell, Northolt, Perivale, Southall) have better services to improve life in Ealing and make it better, safer, cleaner and greener.Unlike the current leader of Ealing Council, Labour's Peter Mason who doesn’t live in the ward he is councillor for and has failed to hold any resident surgeries (including virtual) for over a year despite having a contract to do so, Ealing Independents councillors live and are a part of community the wards they will represent.“I moved to Southall Green fifteen years ago. I live with my wife and two young children, who attend school and nursery in Southall,” says Southall Green resident and candidate for councillor David Marsden.“I’ve worked in Southall for the last six years supporting better neighbourhoods in West London, and Southall in particular.”“I’ve been a leading campaigner in the fight for Clean Air for Southall and Hayes, and I’ve opposed the unsafe development of the highly toxic old Gasworks site at Council meetings and community protests.”Marsden added: “I’ve been an active local Labour party member since 2019. Ordinary Labour party members and a few councillors have always shown solidarity and offered practical help. But we have all been blocked from changing anything for the better by former Ealing Labour Council Leader Julian Bell and his successor Peter Mason, who is also an elected councillor for Southall Green ward. Both are very much on the right wing of the party, and only interested in serving their own interests, not the interests of the people of Southall, whose votes they take for granted.”“Both Bell and Mason accepted over £30,000 in gifts and hospitality from the Gasworks developers, yet refused to openly and transparently declare their financial interests at the public meeting in 2019. Mason, as chair of that meeting, tried to prevent me from speaking to reveal that one of the chemicals being dug up at the Gasworks site, and one of the main causes of the bad smell, is potentially fatal to some people with Asian and African genetic heritage.”“Instead of standing up for residents in his own council ward, Mason took time off to get a Masters degree in Town Planning. Now we are faced with tower blocks going up everywhere, 10,000 new homes, 40,000 new residents and their cars. No wonder they want us all to get on our bikes!”“It’s clear that Mason’s and Labour’s priorities are not in the best interests of Southall residents. It’s time to tell Mason and Labour to get on their bikes, and get out of Southall!”“If elected as an Ealing Independents councillor, I will stand up and make sure that the voices of Southall people are heard in the Council Chamber and elsewhere. I will fight for the rights of Southall people to live, work, learn and play in a cleaner, safer Southall that we can all be proud to call home. I will always be open to listen to people’s problems, concerns, ideas and suggestions in person, by phone, text, email, WhatsApp, Twitter, Facebook and any other means where possible. I will make sure Southall people’s views are represented.”ABOUT EALING INDEPENDENTSSince launching in February 2021 with the sole aim to support all residents and stand up for them, Ealing Independents has focused on ensuring that local people have a party that puts them first.Ealing Independents candidates will give residents something that national political parties do not offer – elected councillors putting the interests of residents ahead of their own self-interest or national party interest.Ealing Independents is committed to ensuring it creates and delivers the borough’s first and only people’s manifesto.This manifesto involves Ealing Independents actively listening to residents and local businesses across the borough and its seven towns to ensure that as a council it follows what the people need – a council that listens to them, helps them, and ensures they are protected.Ealing Independents is the party that loves Ealing, and its councillors will ensure residents are never ignored.All residents in Ealing are invited to submit their thoughts of their priorities for a better Ealing at hello@ealingindependents.com where the party will read every email and listen to the feedback.Among the failures to Ealing residents since 2010, Ealing Labour has:Fought against Southall residents who suffer toxic air from the Southall gasworks development by not taking action against developers and hiding information that advises of the issues causing toxic air.Failed for years to pay Ealing Schools catering staff a Living Wage despite the council claiming to be a Living Wage employer.Poorly engaged with residents instead of creating and ensuring a partnership is developed to improve roads for all users, including cars, bikes and pedestrians in order to unite communities to work together and tackle climate change.Closed youth centres and deprived young people of safe and secure facilities to meet, socialise and develop as citizens.Allowed tower buildings to be approved without listening to local residents and creating architectural and environmental eyesores as well as not helping to provide council homes. These buildings are put up without consideration for the need for services, such as GPs and schools to accommodate residents’ needs.Allowed many of its councillors to ignore residents, not respond to their enquiries and fail to provide meaningful actions to help their wards and those living in it.Poorly maintained public pavements and roads making it difficult for disabled as well as able bodied to get out.Allowed trees to over-grow on pavements along with an increase of refuse on footpaths making them a hazard to walkersClosed recycling refuse centres making it difficult for residents to get to them, and resulting in an increase in fly tipping.For more information on Ealing Independents, email: hello@ealingindependents.com or call 07862 748611.You can also visit our website: www.ealingindependents.comor follow us on Twitter at @ealingindys   - www.Twitter.com/EalingIndysEaling Independentsweb: www.EalingIndependents.comtwitter: www.twitter.com/EalingIndysemail: hello@EalingIndependents.comtel: 07862 748611Ealing Independents is a grassroots group exploring the opportunity for independent candidates to be elected in May 2022 and make Ealing better for all.

Rosco White ● 1415d10 Comments ● 1400d

Transparecy and openess promised by Council Leader Peter Mason, or is it censorship?

Peter Mason, when he become Council Leader, said on Tuesday 18th May 2021 that, "I will lead an open, inclusive and transparent council, that engages local people in the challenges we face" (source: Ealing Today 20/05/2021). Yet I would like to bring to your attention an example of Ealing Council's censorship. When submitting comments/objections to planning applications on the council planning portal, Ealing Council are applying moralistic political censorship, which seems to show them to be wilfully ignorant of past history. On 2nd November 2021, I submitted my objection to Planning Application 215857FUL, the developer's land grab of Friary Place Green. I was the 208th commentator at 11.03pm. On the next day, 3rd November, I looked through the planning portal comments page, and my comments/objections that I submitted had been taken down. This led me to re-submit my comments at 12.39pm, as commentator 222, after someone at W12 0RF. These comments/objections were taken down/censored when I looked at around 1.30pm. All this suggests that the present Ealing Council leadership seem predetermined to approve of this land grab by developer Catalyst/Mount Anvil. My second submission to the Ealing Council planning portal, which is almost identical to my first submission. The only difference is instead of Hitler, I wrote H....r, and instead of Friary Park Estate, I changed the capital "E" into a lower case "e".All this led me to copy my second submission and put it on the ActonW3.com discussion forum under the "Catalyst and Mount Anvil attempt Common Lands Grab through dubious planning application" topic/thread. Below is the text of my first submission to Planning Application 215857FUL. Thanks.  Friary Place Green is Common Land, its derogation cannot be changed without a formal consultation carried out by the Council. A Consultation has not taken place. The Council should be protecting Common Land for the people, and not letting others who do not own it redevelop it for their own profits.  "Salami Slicing Imperialism", that Adolf Hitler practised before World War Two is being applied at local level by the developer, Catalyst and Mount Anvil. "One Man", i.e. the developer is trying to impose his will on the thousands of residents, and objectors, that live in the local area. Why is Ealing Council being feckless towards the "salami slicing" of the peoples' Common Land - Friary Place Green, by greedy avaricious developer.  Please do not let Ealing Council be a malleable Quisling, Chaim Rumkowski or a Vichy Republic lackey collaborator for the avaricious developer. Catalyst and Mount Anvil should have planned for the children's play area and cycle hub on the Friary Park Estate that they are redeveloping into an over dense battery council tax farm. Among other things in this redevelopment, they want to erect a 37 and a 29 storey death trap tower blocks. They should not be allowed to parasite on land that they do not own for their own profit desires. Please protect the peoples' Common Land - Friary Place Green, and the environment in general, and reject planning application 215857FUL.

Anthony Hawran ● 1406d7 Comments ● 1400d

FREE CONFIDENCE COURSE (includes one week self-defence) @REYNOLDS SPORTS CENTRE

A local training academy is offering female residents the chance to participate in their FREE six-week confidence building course (includes one week of self-defence) for free. The course aims to give the participants more independence and learn new techniques.Starting Saturday, 13th November 2021, the course held from 11.00am to 1.00pm and is open to women and girls aged 14 years and older who are looking to learn skills to protect themselves and build confidence.This is the eight occasion Sev Necati Training has offered the courses and based on the feedback received, places will be booked quickly.Read below feedback from participants of last year’s course:“I feel very empowered and strong, really inspired and ready. You will grow, gain independence, grow in strength and be able to help others. I really appreciated the opportunity. I feel very lucky and responsible to help others,” Bethany-Anne said.“I’ve never done a course like this before and wanted to know what it was about. It was brilliant, very fun yet professional. Do it! Every girl and woman should do it,” Virginia said."Reynolds Sports Centre in Acton, West London has hosted several Course’s which also includes self-defence training for women and girls 13 years old upwards. These funded classes in conjunction with the Met Police and MOPAC to name but a few are run by Sev Necati Training. Sev’s classes are professionally run and are expertly delivered and increase confidence in everyone who attends.Reynolds Sports Centre and Everyone Active are proud to host and assist with the running of Sev’s classes in the West London area." General Manager, L.CurtainSev Necati, director, said: “We’re delighted to be running another free course in Ealing. This is a great opportunity for women and girls who want to increase their independence and confidence to take advantage of this offer. The course will provide practical techniques, regardless of their background, age or ability which will include one week in self-defence training and vital knowledge on street safety. At the end of the course participants will feel empowered, more confident and improvement in self-worth.”Sign upThere is one course being offered this time on Saturday from 13th November 2021 to Saturday 18th December 2021.  Held from 11:00am to 1:00pm.Held at Reynolds Sport Centre, Ark Acton Academy, Gunnersbury Lane, W3 8EY. A £10.50 deposit is required to secure a place, which will be returned at the end of the course.For more information and to book your place, email info@sevnecatitraining.comYou must contact Sev on the above e-mail address to book a place and for further information

Sev Necati ● 1415d0 Comments ● 1415d

Restrictive Covenant Breach - Compensation of £224,000 awarded to Ealing neighbours

In March 2018, I was contacted by residents of Elmcroft Close, which is adjacent to 59 Eaton Rise, Ealing W5. This was in connection with a new planning application for a substantial 3-Storey extension to the Victorian house plus a smaller outbuilding in the rear garden. The detached Victorian house at No.59 has a large rear garden which some 28 years ago was subject to several unsuccessful attempts to carry out backland development by the then owner, Mr Richard Millett, on the back of his garden. The Planning Committee refused the application and a subsequent appeal was dismissed by The Planning Inspectorate in Bristol. At that time we were fighting purely on planning grounds. On this occasion in March 2018, I also investigated if there might be a restrictive covenant of any assistance to the Objectors. Eventually after a determined campaign by the Objectors, planning permission was granted by Ealing Council for the new development in February 2020 to convert the property from 2 flats into 7 self-contained flats. The Restrictive Covenant was created in the mid-1960s and stipulated what could be built at the rear of No.59 which included the former boundary wall. Although the wall was replaced by a fence long ago, the covenant limited any new building to that of the original wall-height at that time. Subsequently, this was estimated to be about a metre high. The proposed 3-Storey rear extension would of course be very substantially higher this modest wall and therefore was in clear breach of the Restrictive Covenant. The neighbours raised this issue with the developer and eventually having received planning permission in February last year, the developer subsequently made an Application to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) for a modification of the Restrictive Covenant so as the permit the extension and outbuilding. The original proposal was for 8 flats but this had been replaced by a revised planning application for 7 flats in October 2018. After a Hearing of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on 27th & 28th July 2021, the Tribunal Member, Chartered Surveyor Ms Diane Martin MRICS FAAVA, decided to allow the proposed modification of the Restrictive Covenant but ON TERMS. The terms are according to the 28-page Decision of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) which can be read in full on the Internet is that in order to obtain the proposed Modification, the developer, Mr Emil Moskofian, must pay a total sum of £224,000 to 11 Objectors who reside in the houses at Elmcroft Close (No.1-11) as Compensation. The highest award was of £40,000 to one Objector and the lowest £8,000; five others were awarded £16,000 each and four more were awarded £24,000 each. In past days, the Tribunal might have even turned the application down as the compensation is quite large. This is the third highest award of Compensation in a Middlesex covenant case I know of. In this borough, the highest was £350,000 (flats instead of private dwellinghouses), in Wembley £230,000 for a school building on a playing field where houses are anyway allowed but never built). I note with satisfaction that on page 9 of the Decision, Ms Martin stated with regard to a precedent having been set by their lack of previous objection to height above the boundary of the garden trees, and construction of the first floor balcony, that the objectors originally “were unaware of the covenant until alerted to it by a neighbour in March 2018…“ That neighbour (myself) was able to assist the residents at the start of their battle due to long experience with Restrictive Covenants since our first ever case in December 1986 - March 1991 at 8 Longfield Road Ealing W5 (which took 4 years in the High Court and Lands Tribunal - the longest single covenant case ever fought in Ealing with 6 days in court) preventing a major backland development behind the sequence of gardens of houses in Longfield Road, Castlebar Road and Gordon Road on the “Hanger Hill Estate, Ealing” and the proposed use of the garden of 8 Longfield Road as a Vehicular Access Road after demolition of the red-bricked 1883 dwellinghouse built by James Wills, who lived at 43 Castlebar Road. This lends some weight to the words of a past Tribunal Member that the benefit of a restrictive covenant may be found “like hidden treasure in the hour of need”. Finally, I am glad that I did not take Mr Richard Millett’s advice some 27 years ago when he wrote to me telling me to “go back to Japan and save Tokyo”. Victor Mishiku 29/9/2021 “The Covenant Movement”

Victor Mishiku ● 1442d8 Comments ● 1421d

Backgarden development refused tonight at Committee

I attended the Planning Committee tonight at Ealing Town Hall.  I have been doing so for the last 35 years now.I was interested in the case at 1 Golden Manor W7 which is both in a Conservation Area and faces an adjoining Conservation Area and a small Public Open Space (the "Rose Garden").  In 2017 & 2018, I assisted neighbours fight off a previous worse proposal (which was being recommended for granting by the Planning Department) as on this occasion tonight.Upon arrival, I asked to see the Agenda for the 10 items under discussion.  The Committee Clerk gave me her only copy (and there were 9 members of the public there including former MP, Stephen Pound).  The 1 Golden Manor application was listed as Item 10 on the Agenda but the Agenda I was given only went up to Item 3 (last page 185).On reading the index, I realised that there are supposed to be 264 pages and the ones I wanted to read were pages 219 - 264 but they were all missing!    I was able to read the "Briefing Notes" which were placed on the public seats right at the end of the Victoria Hall (away from the loudspeaker) and straight away I noticed a fatal error in them where the Planning Department had come to the bizarre conclusion that the garden at 1 Golden Manor was "previously-developed" land - in fact it is "Greenfield" as residential gardens in built-up areas are now designated as "Greenfield" since 9th June 2010 when the law was changed to protect green open spaces.  This is not the first time a senior planner has made this mistake (uncorrected by her Area Manager, Ms Alex Jackson - as occurred in another case in W13 as Cllr. Mahmood may recall).After the Objectors' representative addressed the Committee very fully and after they then heard from the developer party, the Members of the Planning Committee discussed the application which Ward Councillor Ray Wall (Chair of the Planning Committee) had called in.I was very impressed by the comments of many of the Committee Members who were not afraid to question the recommendation of the Case Officer who was wholly in favour of the development.A number of the Members expressed concern about the inadequate plot size of the proposed development, the loss of garden land especially when "climate change" is much to the fore these days, actual harm to the Conservation Area and the fact that the proposed development would be out of keeping with the character of the Conservation Area and its original carefully laid-out housing and spacious gardens.The acting Chair, Cllr. Tariq Mahmood, called for a vote and the result was 8 - 3 to REFUSE the planning application.Well done to the residents who stood up to the garden-grabbers!Victor Mishiku  Wednesday 21/7/2021"The Covenant Movement"  vmfree@madasafish.com

Victor Mishiku ● 1512d8 Comments ● 1424d

LTNs gone - but a more fundamental issue.....

The LTNs may (mostly) be gone but like other British politicians in history many Ealing councillors failed to understand the political climate of the day. After over 16 months of restrictions the last thing people wanted was more control and more restrictions - they want their freedoms and their normal way of life back. But whether or not you believed that Low Traffic Neighbourhoods were a good or a bad idea, and notwithstanding any policy from central Government or finance from TfL, whether it’s the LTN fiasco or other issues such as high rise towers or Victoria Hall  the whole saga is symptomatic of a more fundamental issue. That is:  the abuse of position and the erosion of democracy.  With their dogma and their own political agenda they become arrogant, don’t listen, think they know better than the people, and that residents should subscribe to their world view. Driven more by party political agenda than respect for the wishes of the local community, they have lost touch with the residents they are supposed to represent. Ill-thought-out policies alienate local residents, creating an anger and resentment which in itself does not promote a healthy and harmonious community. There are a few very good councillors, but generally our party political system does not produce competent individuals suitable for running a local community for the benefit of its residents. As the respected linguist, historian and political activist Noam Chomsky observed, there are always those prepared to reduce our democracy in order to further their agenda. The same people are still in council and there remains an existential threat to our communities and our democracy. But whatever your political persuasion, residents should remain vigilant else there is the risk of more of a ‘Culture of Control’ and an increasingly authoritarian administration. Local communities do not need party agenda driven politicians. Local communities do need honest and trustworthy people as councillors, who are competent, without party-political ideology, and who listen to the local residents who elect them to office to represent their majority wishes. Certain councillors may not like it, but it’s called democracy. Councillors are our local public servants, not our masters - they are not in power, they are in office at our sufferance. They might do well to remember this. 

Mike Davidson ● 1436d85 Comments ● 1427d

Croydon: Borough’s voters choose directly-elected Mayor system in referendum

Support for a change in the governance arrangement was overwhelming (by DAVE HILL)Croydon Council will be led by a directly-elected Mayor (DEM) in future after voters expressed a strong preference for switching to the mayoral system at a local referendum held yesterday.Of the 58,897 people who cast votes, an overwhelming 47,165 chose to adopt a mayoral model, while only 11,519 opted to retain the current leader-and-cabinet set-up, under which the council leader is elected by fellow councillors rather than by voters. Turnout was 21 per cent.The referendum was held after a petition raised by pro-DEM campaigners last year secured enough signatures of borough electors, five per cent of them, to require the plebiscite to take place.The leader of the Labour-run council at the time, Tony Newman, was opposed to switching to the mayoral system. However, following Newman’s departure a year ago amid severe financial problems at the borough, his successor, Hamida Ali, took a more conciliatory approach.Hackney, Lewisham, Newham and Tower Hamlets have had directly-elected Mayors since early this century, and governance referendums held in the latter two boroughs in May saw local electors vote strongly in favour of retaining them.The workings of the mayoral system can vary, however, with power concentrated in the hands of a Mayor or devolved to councillors in different ways and to differing degrees. Croydon Council says its Mayor will appoint a cabinet and delegate powers to it “so that decisions are made collectively, as at present under the leader/cabinet model.”Both the mayoral and the leader-and-cabinet arrangements are termed executive models of governance, with most decision-making powers held at cabinet level.Labour in Croydon has been divided over the governance question, with local MPs Steve Reed and Sarah Jones opposed to adopting the mayoral system while key activists in the south of the borough have favoured it, along with Croydon South Conservative MP Chris Philp.The referendum petition was supported by a political coalition embracing Labour, a former UKIP candidate and residents’ groups unhappy with the “growth borough” policies of the council under Newman, particularly its enthusiasm for more house-building in a borough that has experienced a rapid population increase.Advocates argued that candidates seeking to become Mayor will have an interest in seeking support across the whole of the borough and tailoring policies accordingly, rather than concentrating their efforts on electoral wards they know they can win. Criticisms of the pro-DEM campaign have included claims that it is motivated by a desire to prevent more homes being built in affluent areas.SOURCE: https://www.onlondon.co.uk/croydon-boroughs-voters-choose-directly-elected-mayor-system-in-referendum/?utm_campaign=12721421_Key%20Issues%2013%20Oct%202021&utm_medium=email&utm_source=London%20Councils&dm_i=192K,7KNWT,M4M0DR,UU03B,1

Rosco White ● 1429d5 Comments ● 1428d

Failure to Display Public Notice on Planning Application

Ever since Ealing Planning Department stopped sending out Notification Letters giving 21 days in which to respond to planning applications nearby, the system of putting up the yellow Public Notices on lampposts has been less than perfect.Disregarding instances where developers have likely pulled them down, the Planning Department itself has not always acted sensibly to ensure that affected neighbours know what it being proposed at close proximity.In a case in Rotherwick Hill (part of the Haymills Estate in Ealing W5), an unneighbourly play tower & platform was erected without planning permission.  Eventually, planning applications were made but the Council did not put up any Notices in the road where the adjoining back garden of an Ashbourne Close neighbour would be badly affected and where the neighbour had previously complained about the unauthorised structure overlooking their garden.Because no yellow Public Notice was put up in Ashbourne Close, the most affected neighbour was unaware of the latest application and therefore did not write in within the usual 21 days - only finding out that an Appeal to The Planning Inspectorate (PINS) had been lodged months later.   Because the neighbour had not filed an objection at first instance, the rules did not allow her to respond to the Appeal!The writer contacted PINS to explain the situation which was made worse as the Appellant's Planning Consultants were stressing that the neighbour had not objected at first instance and therefore there was no problem!PINS however were not satisfied that natural justice was being observed and ruled that the affected neighbour should be allowed to make her objections.The Appeal was dismissed by PINS yesterday  - please see at:https://www.dropbox.com/preview/AppealDecisionDismissedByPINS.13thMay2021.pdf?role=personalThis result vindicates the objection of the neighbour in Ashbourne Close - the road in which the Planning Department failed to put up a Public Notice!V.Mishiku  - "The Covenant Movement" vmfree@madasafish.com

Victor Mishiku ● 1580d37 Comments ● 1445d

Anyone know anything about the new "Ealing Independents" standing in the next Council Elections?

I have just emailed and asked them if they still exist and what they're doing.Will post the reply here as/when/if I receive one.     😊https://ealingindependents.com/Ealing Independents is a fast growing grassroots group set up by Ealing resident Leslie Bunder to explore the opportunity for independent candidates to contest Ealing local elections.  This is through an umbrella alliance of like-minded people standing united on a shared vision and manifesto, which Ealing Independents is developing for a better, safer, cleaner and greener Ealing for all.These independent candidates will be standing to be councillors to ensure that Ealing residents and businesses get improved and better services to improve life in Ealing and make it better, safer, cleaner and greener.The independent candidates will represent Ealing residents and businesses in Acton, Ealing, Greenford, Hanwell, Northolt, Perivale and Southall.We are not a party at present but have formed a group to support the importance independent candidates can play in local elections.Ealing Independents wants to see Ealing becomes a better place for everyone to live, work and study in.We will work to ensure Ealing becomes a be better, safer, cleaner and greener borough for all.This website serves as an introduction to Ealing Independents and will be updated on a regular basis as we develop our plans.Local independent candidates offer an alternative to the existing political parties who place national politics ahead of local people and issues in Ealing.The next local elections in Ealing for councillors will take place in May 2022.We support and will help create a true local manifesto for Ealing in time for the next election.Before then, we are listening to all residents and businesses across Ealing. We want to ensure the manifesto reflects their needs so that Ealing Council run by independents will provide better services to all.A change of council is needed, as the existing political parties have let down residents and businesses by following their own national party political agendas.Party politics has been allowed to damage Ealing and hurts residents and local businesses alike.We are people from all parts of the community united to making Ealing better after years of not being listened to by the established parties who have shown total disregard to residents and local businesses.Like so many residents and businesses, we are fed up with the way the existing council has been run. It has failed to listen to local people, not been open or transparent and provides very little accountability.We will be challenging the established parties by championing true local candidates who are not influenced by party politics but instead are driven to making Ealing a better place for residents and businesses.Ealing Independents will listen and help in supporting Ealing residents and businesses by seeking to ensure local independent candidates have the opportunity to challenge the established parties.Ealing Independents is all about putting Ealing residents and businesses first and ensuring their needs are represented and their issues are fully addressed to ensure Ealing becomes a better place for all

Rosco White ● 1454d7 Comments ● 1452d