What's going to be left?

Shortly after I sent in the 600+ petitions from the Roehampton area demanding action from the Conservative-run council on street-drinking in the Danebury Avenue area, the Tories responded firstly by denying there was any problem - and if there was one they had fixed it (this was in the middle of the coldest winter in recent years).

They said no other council had ever implemented the sort of alcohol exclusion zone I was calling for - yet a straightforward google of those three words provides a great list of councils who have done exactly that.

And they said that even if there was a problem - the same problem they'd just denied the existence of - the same failed policies they'd been applying would fix it even though they've failed for years.

But then the Conservatives decided to take action. First they removed the benches outside the library - a favoured gathering place for the street drinkers admittedly. So they moved across the road to sit on the stone benches outside the post office. A move that made people accessing post office services - especially the ATM there - very uncomfortable.

So now the Tories have taken those benches out too.

This is an ingenious plan by the Conservatives. Rather than just ban street drinking in the area, they are choosing to strip from Roehampton every facility used by the street drinkers until there's going to be nothing left. What's the next step - evict all the shops from Danebury Avenue and Roehampton until there's nowhere for them (or anyone else) to buy anything?

We already know the Tories want to concrete over the green beside the library because it was in their crazy demolition plans for Danebury Avenue - so perhaps they'll bring that idea forward so there's no grass on which they can gather either?

They should probably demolish the wall by the library the drinkers are now sitting on, even though it keeps the pavement around the library from subsiding into the green - but why worry about that?

No. The Conservatives have completely lost the plot. They're not removing facilities that only street drinkers use: they're punishing the entire community around the town centre by removing these facilities. It's as if they think it's Roehampton's fault the Conservatives can't or won't deal with street drinkers.

Well it isn't - it's the Conservatives' failure, not Roehampton's. It only becomes the responsibility of Roehampton if, despite all the evidence of Conservative neglect, failure and incompetence, on May 7th the people of Roehampton wake up to the same Tory MP and councillors they've just re-elected.

More action: Durford Crescent

There are hundreds of potholes still unattended in Roehampton: my team counted almost 50 in Holybourne Avenue alone yesterday, but one of the most neglected roads in the area was Durford Crescent, which runs between Bessborough Road and Wanborough Drive.

I asked for this area to be given top priority and it has been. And we were there on Sunday to check that the holes had all been filled-in.

--------------------------
From: Jolley, Steve
Sent: 25 February 2010 10:30
Cc: Bhatia, Mena
Subject: DTS559344 - State of Durford Crescent
?
I refer to your e-mail dated 11th of February concerning the above, which has been passed to me for reply.

The reported areas were subsequently inspected, and all of the potholes that met the criteria for urgent repair were programmed accordingly.

Orders were then raised for the potholes to be repaired, and I am advised that the repairs have now been completed.

Yours sincerely

Steve Jolley
Assistant On Street Services Manager
London Borough of Wandsworth

Action on Alton Road...at last

Anyone even slightly familiar with Roehampton will be aware of the boarded up, dilapidated houses at the end of Alton Road by Roehampton Lane. They bear more than a passing resemblance, in this state, to the Bates Mansion in Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho.

They've been derelict for years, slowly falling apart as parts and original features have been stripped from them and a collapsed roof has gradually allowed the buildings to rot from within.

The owners of these properties - a company registered in Jersey - has been trying to demolish these houses - two of the last reminders of what Roehampton was like before the Alton estate was built - and build a massive block of private flats in their place.

For once, the Conservative council has been on the right side of this overdevelopment battle and has been rejecting the developers' ideas - if not in principle at least in practice. And this has resulted in a stalemate: the developer refusing to return the homes to habitable use; the council refusing to give them carte blanche to build whatever they like there.

Well now that impasse is hopefully about to be broken. The Council will next week consider plans to compulsorily purchase the land from its current absentee owners and then sell it on to someone who wants to do right by this site.

I support the council's move on this if for no other reason than we need to break this stalemate and do something with this shabby, neglected part of Roehampton. But my strong preference is that the council actually restore these buildings using a tiny fraction of the millions they've recevied from council house sell-offs, convert them into self-contained two-bed flats and rent them out as new affordable homes for Roehampton families.

That's the best way to preserve Roehampton's heritage, return homes to housing people and revitalise this corner of our area.

Estate gardens

When a lot of estates were originally planned, right across the borough some were designed with garden areas adjacent to the blocks for those on upper floors who couldn't benefit from a backyard of their own.

This was an entirely laudable objective but, as we see above, it's not one that's worked very well in practice, broadly speaking. The picture above is of the gardens to Hascombe House in Dilton Gardens on the Alton estate, but there are examples right across Putney, Wandsworth and indeed London.

The problem, I think, is that these gardens were always exposed - they were never really private spaces that could only be accessed by the householder through their own property, but were plots of land right next to public space and never well-enough fenced or secured to make them vandal-proof or sufficiently private.

The result is as you see above: largely derelict plots, overgrown and flytipped: and what could have been some really useful space has become an eyesore.

There are two ways to resolve problems like this. Either we make an effort to revive these gardens as they were first intended, this time with decent fencing, secure locks and designated tenants responsible for them; or we turn them into proper communal space, landscaped or with facilities the residents can make use of.

The Conservatives, however, have taken the third way on this: just allow the rack and ruin of these gardens without taking any responsibility for them: the worst of all worlds.

It seems crazy to me that on estates where hundreds of residents have no access to gardens of their own, we lack the imagination and creativity to turn these plots into productive, useful spaces. There are huge waiting lists for allotments in Wandsworth and any number of ways we can find the manpower for the first big push that will get the land cleared up and fit for planting. One example I favour would be to use the community payback scheme to get minor offenders contributing productively to those areas they blighted with their criminality.

As I wrote on Sunday, we could allocate some of the money the council gets from all the filming that takes place on the Alton as a down-payment for the new fencing and security needed for these sites. But funding isn't the issue - every year the council carries over tens of thousands of pounds from minor estate improvement budgets meant for exactly this type of work.

No, what is needed is local leadership which, as I keep saying, is so evidently lacking from the Conservatives in Putney and Roehampton. Transforming this space meets so many goals: it smartens up our estates; it gives local people garden and recreation space; and it makes good use of derelict land.

Labour councillors will make this happen - a vote for the Conservatives gets you the sort of dereliction we see in Dilton Gardens.

Action, not words

On Monday I wrote about the issues I'd raised with the council on the Alton estate, which I'd picked up when my team visited the Ibsley Gardens and Diurford Crescent area over the weekend.

Here's the reply I've just received - simply to show that good local elected representatives can get these problems sorted out really easily: it's just that the Conservatives simply can't be bothered to.


-----Original Message-----
From: Tysome, Mike
Sent: 23 February 2010 15:17
Cc: Housing Directorate (Support)
Subject: FW: 40339 Ibsley Gardens, Fontley Way and Dilton Gardens issues


1. The fly tip has now been removed.

2. The pothole in Fontley way has been passed to colleagues in the Department of technical services.

3. I have contacted BT with the location of the damaged phone box.

4. The paving and the broken drain cover have been passed to a contractor and will be repaired shortly.

Regards
Mike Tysome
Chief Estate Services Manager

Weekend casework

These are some of the issues I've been taking up this weekend:



Roehampton Councillor candidate Sean Lawless documents a growing flytip in Ibsley Gardens just behind Fontley Way



One of the thousands of potholes due less to the recent icy weather and more to years of Conservative cuts to road repairs budgets - this one on Fontley Way



Sean Lawless shows how vandalised this phonebox in Ibsley Gardens has been - we've asked the council as managers of the estate to co-operate with BT in getting the window panes reinstalled.



And here uneven paving in Dilton Gardens by Durford Crescent has created pooling despite a drain being right next to the steps: it takes very little effort to fix this. It's relatively minor things like this, repeated hundreds and hundreds of times across the estate that make the Alton look so run down and neglected under the Conservatives.

The bill from The Bill should be spent on the Alton

If you ever watch the ITV show The Bill you may have noticed the striking resemblance between some of the supposedly East-End Sunhill council estates and Roehampton's Alton - and it's not a coincidence.

In the past three years alone, Wandsworth Council has been paid over £5,000 in royalties for granting permission for filming a variety of TV programmes, including The Bill, Newsnight and CrimeWatch. Only a few days ago a major shoot was being filmed in Stoatley House on Bessborough Road, and both Highcliffe Drive and Ringwood Gardens featured in an epsiode of The Bill last week.



I'm all for such enterprise: if TV companies want to make money from filming in our borough they should. But I also think that a share of the proceeds the council earns from such enterprise should be specifically ring-fenced for the area the filming takes place in, and for the inconvenience residents of those areas put up with. That's especially true of somewhere like the Alton, where the council should never be short of ways in which to invest money given the state they keep it in.

But when I asked how much the Alton gets specifically the answer came back: not a penny.

Instead, the money just goes into two massive pots - one for the housing department and one for Leisure & Sports - both to be spent anywhere in Wandsworth. Now some of this money may eventually find its way back to the Alton: the Leisure Department runs Roehampton Library, for example, but I just think that there would be much more good will generated if a share of the money from Alton filming paid for Alton improvements - clearly and directly.

And if the council can't think of anything to spend it on, get in touch: residents and I can give them plenty of ideas.

New rules on student digs will help the Alton

New rules introduced by our Labour Government will mean that landlords who want to let their home to more than three or more unrelated people will need to get planning permission.

This is a really important measure because, in Roehampton at least, it will help rebalance our community.

Here's the problem. After their first year in halls of residence, most Roehampton University students move into private rented homes principally on the Alton Estate but in surrounding areas, too.

If they were dispersed throughout the estate that wouldn't be a problem, but what has happened on the Alton is that student homes are concentrated in very specific parts of it - places like Sherfield Gardens, Laverstoke Gardens, Swanwick Close, Hersham Close and parts of Bessborough Road and Petersfield Rise, to name just a few of those with the highest numbers.

The problem is that these aren't student-only areas: students live side by side with long term residents. And inevitably there are conflicts between students, here for no more than a year (and without a long-term commitment to the estate), and residents for whom this is their permanent home.

Add to that different lifestyles: those of students enjoying their three or four years before the responsibilities of working life kick-in, set against those of families trying to get their kids (or themselves) to sleep while a party is going on next door.

It creates tensions. This new planning law Labour has introduced can help resolve those tensions simply by capping the number of homes in any given block or street that can be turned into HMOs (homes in multiple occupation) rather than being kept for families or individuals.

Now I hear the concerns of the NUS - expressed in the Evening Standard article from Friday - about forcing students into a ghetto - but on the Alton it would have the reverse effect. It would break up student "ghettos" - and in so doing those areas would become cleaner, better maintained and more cohesive - happier.

And that's what the Alton's lost these past two decades since Conservative right-to-buy legislation started going wrong - when those who had bought their council homes moved out and buy-to-let landlords took over, renting house after house on the estate to students (and others).

I think the way to rebuilding a strong community on the Alton is rebuilding balanced communities that have pride in their area. We don't get that if any particular part of the estate is dominated by those who are simply passing through with different, conflicting priorities to others.

We've got to start paying more attention to our planning laws - it's a theme I return to again and again, whether it is this issue, local planning overdevelopment or the need for a Plan for Putney - because the Conservative laissez-faire, do nothing approach to planning is wrecking those areas that need strong communities the most.

Is Minstead being decanted?

At the end of September last year I noticed that several of the bungalows in Minstead Gardens looked empty. When I asked the council whether this was deliberate or just coincidence, they denied that there was any problem with vacant properties in Minstead Gardens at all. Here's what they wrote in a reply of 5th October:

"The Hostels Team are responsible for the management of all the odd numbered properties at Minstead Gardens (a total of 16 units).

"There are currently four void units amongst the odd numbered properties at Minstead Gardens. I would like to confirm that the properties are not being decanted for any reason. These properties became vacant after each of the tenants was made an offer of permanent accommodation.

"Members of the Hostels Team visit the tenants living at Minstead Gardens each week to ensure they are occupying their properties.

"The average length of time a property is vacant before a new tenant moves in, is two to three weeks."

So two to three weeks from 5th October - by the end of that month in fact, you'd have thought the flats would be let, wouldn't you?

Fast forward to Sunday just past, 24th January. At least five properties - the exact same properties I wrote to the council about in September - are vacant. They're self-evidently empty - anyone walking past them will be able to tell which ones have no tenant. And I say "at least" because those are the five we called upon based on the current electoral register - electors who don't exist at these bungalows.

But there are huge gaps in the Minstead Gardens electoral register - something not entirely unsurprising given that hostel accommodation generally has a high turnover of residents - but something which also suggests that the number of vacant - or void - properties here is far higher.

It is widely acknowledged that Wandsworth has a very severe housing shortage. That several council properties have been standing empty for months is completely unacceptable. Either the Conservatives are deliberately keeping them empty, callously denying local people a home - or they're empty because of oversight or carelessness: and that speaks to incompetence.

More casework from the Alton

Sadly, the disgusting state of Harbridge Avenue yesterday wasn't the only problem I'm having to raise with the Conservative council today.

Similar problems of overflowing bin chambers and flytips at Portswood Place:



And a cleaning contractor that thinks just sweeping rubbish into a great heap and leaving it passes as acceptable cleanliness - also at Portswood Place (with the Methodist Church in the background):



A flytip on the corner of Minstead Gardens and Portswood Place:



And here several of the wooden bollards at the bottom end of Minstead Gardens have been damaged but heck, despite Minstead Gardens comprising sheltered housing for the elderly, why on earth fix the dangerous holes and loose paving the damage has caused - just stick a cone nearby and hope no-one injures themselves:



Another flytip in Minstead Gardens - at the top by Richmond Park. The Conservative jobsworths will say this isn't on their land. I guess it's ok to just leave this festering eyesore then?



And I'm not sure how long it's been since the council's out-of-town couldn't-care-less cleaning contractor cleared up the Sherfield Gardens verge along Danebury Avenue but aside from being littered from one end to the other, it also has been flytipped with a sofabed and a pinball machine:



Finally, to add to the Conservatives' collection of potholes, this one in Swanwick Close is about seven inches deep and a real hazard to anyone coming down the slope from Minstead Gardens or Chadwick Close - just one of several potholes in the vicinity, including at the bus stop by the bull sculpture:



The two posts from the Alton I've published today can be summarised in four simple words:

Conservatives: couldn't care less.

Harbridge Groundhog Day

You may recall that late last year I posted some of the photos my campaign team took of Harbridge Avenue: overflowing bins spilling their detritis all over the pavements; flooded pathways, potholes, grass verges torn up by vehicles driving over them to cut corners.

When I highlight issues like these, as you would expect I also take them up directly with the council and they replied on 12 December last year promising to...well, do not very much to improve this environment for residents.

And as a result, look what we found when we were in Harbridge again yesterday.

The grass verge even more damaged and rutted:



The road surface even more damaged and potholed - and take my word for it when I say I have six or seven other photos the entire length of Harbridge Avenue of pothole after pothole:



The completely unacceptable, envrionmental health-risk overflowing rubbish bins and flytips that go uncleared. The Conservatives helpfully tell us: "The Council's waste collection contractor, Biffa, are not contracted to collect overspill waste left on the floor." So either contract them to, or increase refuse collections so residents have no resort other than to flytip:



More examples from the other side of Harbridge:



And why can't the refuse bins be stored in the bin chambers? Because the bin chambers are almost as full of it as the Conservatives are:



Here, Peter Carpenter, one of Labour's Roehampton council candidates, highlights the fact that every single sapling planted in Harbridge Avenue has been vandalised. The answer: plant more mature trees that are far harder to destroy - don't just leave the support stakes forlornly where the saplings once stood:



...And another example of the tree vandalism:


Peter inspects the flytip which I've reported along with all the other problems listed here - and plenty others which I'll write about in a blog post this afternoon.



Elections are about choices. Roehampton can choose to continue with the Conservatives who leave their environment in this state and say it is beyond their ability to do anything to improve it. Conservatives who wouldn't dream of putting up with this where they live - but who think it's fine for council estate residents.

Or you can vote for change - vote for councillors who say: "This is disgusting and unacceptable - but it doesn't have to be like this."

A Labour vote will restore council caretakers to our estates - replacing the out-of-town, couldn't-care-less cleaning contractor the Tories keep rehiring. Labour councillors in Roehampton will work with me to invest in a respectable environment in places like Harbridge Avenue - because one thing's for sure: if the council can't be bothered to take care of an area, they're in no position whatsoever to lecture local people to do so.

Simply put: a Labour vote says: "enough's enough".

Roehampton SureStart has closed the gap

This is one of those really important stories that the media simply won't report - but Roehampton SureStart, the Labour Government initiative to help children and young families in our least affluent areas has succeeded in eradicating the gap between how children in its catchment area develop educationally compared to affluent areas.

This straightforward chart shows the impact SureStart's had in Roehampton:



Let me just explain what the jargon means. There are two key measures for assessing how children are "developing": PSE stands for Personal, Social and Emotional development - in other words how children interact with each other, cope spending time on their own, and their relationships with their parents. CLL is Communications, Language and Literacy - ie how a child is developing educationally.

And this chart, which looks at just personal, social and emotional development shows even more starkly the difference SureStart is making - the columns are almost equal after ten years of Labour government SureStart:



There are two questions that need to be answered now. First, isn't this more Labour-generated propaganda?

The answer to that is no - I took these tables from a report written by the Conservative-run council last week; which is available here. In fact, Councillor Kathy Tracey, the Conservative Cabinet member for Children's Services in Wandsworth attended the Roehampton Partnership on Friday endorsing the successes the report highlights.

Second, the cynics will question whether this has anything to do with SureStart rather than general factors. In response to that, it's really interesting that there are two other "big" SureStart schemes in the borough: one in Battersea and one in Tooting. Both started after Roehampton's - Battersea came next and Tooting was much more recent.

The same charts for each show lags in children's development - more in Tooting than Battersea and both behind Roehampton. The principal difference between them is the length of time Roehampton SureStart's been running - and it certainly isn't comparative deprivation: Roehampton is far more disadvantaged than Tooting, for example (Which is why Roehampton's SureStart got set up first).

Actually, there's a third question - and it's one that Putney's Conservative MP has to answer. It's simply this: SureStart works and here's the proof - so why is your party, the Conservative Party, planning to abolish SureStart if you get into power?

Alcohol Zone: Roehampton says yes, Tories say no

I've just read the response from the Conservative council to the petition of over 600 Roehampton and Putney residents calling for an Alcohol Exclusion Zone for Roehampton.

It's riddled with inaccuracies, jargon and excuses not to act. I'll give you just five:

First, that "no alcohol exclusion zones are known to have been established in the UK." Well, they may not know it, but had they done a quick google search, they could have educated themselves quite easily. How about Rotherham, Winchester, Pontefract, East Lothian, North Tyneside - shall I go on? If the Conservatives are so ignorant as to make such basic mistakes, what confidence can we have in anything else they have to say?

Second:"The practicality of this approach in such a small area where displacement is likely [is] merely likely to displace the problem to the immediate vicinity around the zone".

Well, that depends what the immediate vicinity is, doesn't it? If it's just the shopping parade at Danebury Avenue then of course there could be displacement: to Portswood Place or Petersfield Rise or the village. And no one's arguing for that - I'm certainly not. If, however, the AEZ covers an area bounded by Richmond Park, Priory Lane, Clarence Lane, Roehampton Lane and a perimeter around the village, the only places left for street drinkers to disperse are heaths and parks. And they won't disperse there because there is no ready supply of alcohol for them in the middle of Richmond Park.

But then, just listen to their third argument: that were a zone to be implemented, it would "need to be large and as a result difficult to justify".

Hang on: one minute their case is that an AEZ won't work because it will be too small, but now it's because it will be too large! Which is it? And it's even more baffling given that Winchester's AEZ covers the whole of the city, and Bromley's covers the whole of Beckenham town centre: far bigger areas than Roehampton. And they're working fine, thank you.

Fourth, they conjour up a figure of £10,000 to create the AEZ - a figure they offer no substantiation for and which, incidentally, pales into inconsequence compared to the £350,000 they've just squandered on their aborted Danebury demolition debacle.

The fifth is just about the most bizarre claim you'll ever hear a council make. They claim that an AEZ would demand the confiscation of all alcohol - open or not, from anyone - drinking it or not, without exception. I've got to ask: do you really believe Rotherham, with its city-wide AEZ, is a 1930s prohibition mecca? Or Tyneside? Or the entire city of Winchester? The Conservatives make fools of themselves, and show their contempt for the people of Roehampton, with such absurd claims.

We then get more of the same weak and ineffective excuses for a lack of action so far: that it's a new problem (no it isn't); that their current efforts have changed habits (no they haven't); that the problem's diminished in the cold weather (yes it has but do you really think it won't return the moment it's not freezing cold?); that the drinkers are mainly local (so what?) and that getting them to sign slips of paper promising to be good are far more effective ways of dealing with them (need I comment on this!?).

For some reason the Conservative are afraid to take the action Roehampton needs to deal with this problem. I don't know what the source of that fear is, but it exists and it's failing Roehampton.

Let me put it this way: Roehampton did not just create a 600-signature petition, which could have been double or treble that size with very little extra work, to get such a peremptory, dismissive and weak response. They signed up in droves because they want action - and for us all that action is long overdue. But it's clear we won't get it from this lot.

When we say "campaigning all year round" we mean it!

Yesterday I was out and about in Roehampton with my campaign team, and despite the bitter weather we got a warm reception.

I was concerned about the council's neglect of the paths and roads on the estate, especially as the Alton was built on some pretty steep slopes. And even if you think it's understandable that not every path on the estate has been cleared of ice - as I do - it isn't acceptable that steps haven't, which ought to be a much more achievable aim for the housing department.

Plenty of new year casework to take up including the case of a council tenant whose window was smashed in a burglary last October and which the council still hasn't repaired.

I'm pictured discussing some of those issues with Sean Lawless who grew up on the Alton estate. Sean's been an important part of my campaign team since last spring and is an example of how my campaign is getting the local community involved - not just dumping outsiders on Roehampton as the Conservatives have a track record of doing.

The cost of the Danebury demolition debacle

How much do you think the Conservatives have poured down the drain on their abandoned plans to demolish Danebury Avenue and replace it with stuff no one, apart from them, wanted?

Well, some of the cost has now been forced out of them by Labour councillors and here are the headline figures.

£133, 739 paid to Savills, the private consultants that spent almost two years drawing up the unpopular Conservative plans only to then advise the Tories they were unworkable

£103,739 paid to Urban Initiatives - the first set of consultants the Conservatives sacked

£96,547 in officer time on the second (Savills) consultation - the Conservatives failed to keep any record of the amount of officer time spent on the first (Urban Initiatives) plans, but you get the broad idea of how much extra to add to the bill

£11,898 on glossy leaflets which very few Roehampton residents ever received

£345,923 is the -literally - Conservative assessment of how much the council has wasted on doing absolutely nothing for Roehampton.

However, there are far larger liabilities of which we still don't know the full cost. From the moment the Tories condemned Allbrook House and the two Danebury blocks above the shops, these properties became almost worthless: who'd buy a home with the threat of demolition hanging over it?

The Conservatives have long been bad for Roehampton. The fact that they've now admitted wasting a minimum of £350,000 on absolutely nothing means we can add utter incompetence to their list of failures, too.

Allbrook community action

Regenerate, the Roehampton charity that, among other things, organises the annual Roehampton Festival and provides plenty of activities for Alton teenagers to get involved with has just press-released an event they helped organise a few weeks ago in Allbrook House, the block above Roehampton Library:

"Regenerate, along with 2 local churches, joined the residents of Allbrook House, Roehampton for the first 'Love Allbrook House'day.

"Frustrated with the state of their block, the residents organised the day to scrub clean the walls, floors and ceilings of the lifts, lobby and 9 flights of stairs.

"With council plans to demolish the block withdrawn, the residents have fresh hope to make it a nicer place to live. Here are some quotes from residents:

'It?s been a great opportunity for everyone to get to know one another better'

'By working as a team we can make this block a better place. We should do this again every month!'

"Big up everyone for getting your hands dirty."

I'm a big fan of initiatives like this that help residents in what are too-often called "soulless" blocks get to know each other and thereby foster stronger communities.

But isn't the bigger issue that residents felt the need to deep clean their block because of the unacceptable state the Conservatives allow it to fall into repeatedly? Residents keep complaining about the low standards the Conservatives hold their cleaning contractors to but nothing ever changes.

It'c slear the Conservatives either can't or won't. That's why you need to change it yourselves - at the elections next year.

More on the Regenerate facebook page - why not become a fan? I am.

600 say street drinking must stop

The photo above was taken earlier this evening when I handed in petitions signed by over 600 Roehampton and Putney people demanding an Alcohol Exclusion Zone in Roehampton.

Councillors Rex Osborn (left) and Billi Randall will have the job of pushing the council to get serious about this issue as the petition now has to be acknowledged and responded to by the Conservative council.

This has been a huge response and the idea clearly commands widespread support, as witenssed by the fact that the majority of signatures came not from the campaign cards I sent out but from those who signed the petitions in local shops including the Right Plaice chip shop and the post office in Danebury Avenue.

The other thing I know Roehampton residents want to tell the council is: get on with it - this has been a problem for years and the Conservative council has done nothing whatsoever about it.

Even now, instead of doing what residents want, Conservative councillors in Roehampton are talking about getting the street drinkers to sign pieces of paper promising to turn over a new leaf.

This isn't good enough: it won't solve the problem and it doesn't give the police the powers they need to improve Roehampton for good. Nothing less than a complete ban on street drinking in the Danebury Avenue area - which includes the village, the Petersfield Rise parade and the Portswood Place parade will do.

Roehampton residents have done their bit. Now it's time for the Conservative council - for once - to do right by Roehampton.

Weekend casework

Harbridge Avenue is constantly littered - made far worse by palladin bins being placed on the pavements which invites flytipping and animals to scatter waste all over the place.


Another feature of Harbridge Avenue is pathways that end in dead-ends like this on the corner of Ellisfield Drive; which also get flooded whenever it rains a little because there is no run-off.


More Harbridge Avenue palladins dumped on the pavement, surrounded by rubbish. Really unpleasant for the people who have to live here.

This is the junction of Harbridge Avenue with Ellisfield Drive: completely flooded on Sunday evening.


Chadwick Close is one of the relatively new developments where Roehampton Gate School used to be behind Danebury Avenue. And this is their refuse storage area - piled high with rubbish that has clearly not been emptied for weeks. What a health hazard!


These puddles - in Highcross Way (left) and Timsbury Walk (right) - exist because the drains beneath them are blocked solid by Conservative council neglect. In Timsbury Walk the puddles are right in front of residents' front gates - often flooding into their gardens; while in Highcross Way you can see how long it's been since this path has been swept.


A flytip in Timsbury Walk


This is the bottom of Danebury Avenue near Priory Lane - again, flooded after heavy but hardly extraordinary amounts of rain. And again, look at the leaf mulch which indicates how long it's been since basic street cleaning has been carried out here.


These are some of the photos my campaign team took over the weekend on the Alton Estate. Harbridge Avenue, in particular, is in a disgusting state - and sadly it's not that unusual for it to be.

In addition to the rubbish, potholes, unswept-up leaves that had turned to slippery mulch, bad paving and the other usual failings of the Conservative council, over the weekend we also saw the impact of blocked drains throughout the estate, unable to cope with the heavy but hardly unexceptional rain we all experienced on Sunday.

I'm on the case here - already, I've secured guarantees from the London & Quadrant Housing Association which is responsible for the piled-up refuse in Chadwick Close, to clear it today.

The problems the council are responsible for are going to be much harder to fix - not least because there is no interest - let alone leadership from the Conservatives to provide a decent environment for Alton residents to live in.

Harbridge Avenue is of a similar design to Sherfield Gardens, which I exposed the state of a few months ago. And it's in a similar - maybe even worse - state. Residents have been let down by the Conservatives for too long. It's time for action. It's time for change.

What price security?

Kimpton House in Fontley Way on the Alton estate is, unfortunately, a greater focus for anti-social behaviour and crime than some of the others. One of the reasons for this is that, alone among the six Fontley Way blocks, it doesn't have a controlled entry system.

And the reason that's the case is that, again alone among the Fontley Way blocks, Kimpton House contains a (big) majority of leaseholders who effectively hold a veto over plans to make such changes because they are liable for the costs of the work. 31 of the 45 flats here have been sold off by the council - not only high for the Alton but strange given that the average for the other Fontley blocks is 8. Such quirks, incidentally, don't happen by accident - it was Conservative policy to target blocks for sell-offs right across Wandsworth, and this is one of the consequences.

I've just had an email from the council telling me that they're going to try and persuade Kimpton House to vote for controlled entry in the New Year. But they go on to tell me that the cost of such work will saddle leaseholders with £1,500 bills.

Just think about that for a minute. £1,500 per flat. 45 flats. £67,500 in total. To fit some secure doors and provide entryphones in each flat. Is it any wonder that the leaseholders vote "no" when presented with such absurdly inflated costs by the Conservatives?

Council contractors are notorious for thinking that council funded contracts are cash cows where over the top quotes can be submitted with impunity: in one case a quote to provide a few flowerbaskets came back at more than £1,000 per basket - but was eventually whittled down to less than £200 - including maintenance costs!

For £67,500, I'd expect gold-plated doors and entryphone systems. Well, not quite, but you get the point. Kimpton House deserves greater security of the sort the other Fontley Way blocks have benefited from for years. They could get it; but not while the Conservatives keep trying to impose extortionate charges on leaseholders.

Getting the Points

Last week my campaign team (some of them pictured above) and I were out and about calling on residents in the Alton estate's Point blocks: the eleven high rises in Norley Vale, Dilton Gardens and Wanborough Drive.

We called on residents during the day on Thursday and got as good a response as we do during our regular weekend visits across the constituency - and our Roehampton councillor candidates - Ben Smith, Peter Carpenter and Donald Roy got lots of support for my Alcohol Exclusion Zone campaign, and found lots of relief that the Conservatives' disastrous demolition of Danebury Avenue plan had bitten the dust.

The choice for the Points and the rest of the Alton is simple: local Labour leadership on the issues that matter to residents or the same old Conservatives who neglect the estate, sell off so many council homes that there's no room left for the sons and daughters of local people, pour hundreds of thousands of pounds down the drain on a botched demolition plan for the centre of the area and simply don't care about Roehampton.

Debate on the Gate

Stuart by one of the potential locations for an Alton Gate - at the end of Ibsley Gardens

One of the campaigns that Putney's former Labour MP Tony Colman began, and which I've been happy to continue, is that of a new pedestrian and cyclist gate into Richmond Park from the Alton estate.

After years of paralysis, as the Conservative council squabbled with the Royal Parks Agency over whether they had it in them to make a fairly simple idea a reality, we at last have some progress.

A new Alton Gate has been proposed and consulted on. Unfortunately, there's a real question over whether it should be located where the council proposes to put it.

They want the gate from Tunworth Crescent, which for anyone who knows the estate is just about the closest point to the existing Roehampton Gate at the end of Priory Lane. To be honest, anyone who can walk or cycle to Tunworth Crescent can walk or cycle the fifty metres or so to Roehampton Gate.

It would be far better, in my view, for a new Alton Gate to be more centrally located. I understand the desire of the council for the gate to be as close to Danebury Avenue as possible - this isn't entirely unreasonable, but they do seem to forget that Danebury Avenue serves only half the Alton estate. The Alton East wouldn't get any benefit from it, even though parts of this end of the estate aren't too far from Chohole Gate off Norstead Place.

If the main concern is centrality, then Ibsley Gardens or Fontley Way would be more direct - indeed, there is some derelict council land in Fontley Way alongside the park (between Crondall and Runnymede Houses) and it wouldn't appear to be too hard to upgrade the path from Holybourne Avenue through Fontley Way and between the high rise blocks to Richmond Park.

It's likely that wherever the gate is proposed, some residents are going to be unhappy with it being near them: fearing the extra people passing by will cause noise and anti-social behaviour.

That's certainly the case with Tunworth Crescent - where 61% of the residents opposed the gate being located near them. That compares to an overall 69% for the gate across the whole Alton estate. With such a clear cut majority, the council is planning to forge ahead with the plan.

But I have to ask: given that a gate in this location will add little value to the estate, and the campaign for a gate to serve the Alton East will probably continue regardless of whether a Tunworth Gate gets opened, wouldn't it be better to get this right and find the right spot to give residents long overdue access to the park on their doorstep?

You can read the report on the Alton Gate here - it also includes news on some other Roehampton issues including improved paths through the Alton, better bus information and more.

Says it all, doesn't it?

Greening misleads voters on Roehampton business rates

Putney's Conservative MP recently had a newspaper in Roehampton delivered claiming that the area was badly affected by "large rises in the business rates tax". If you don't live in Roehampton, you probably got a variant of this story as it's a generic story the Conservatives have put in all their newsletters with just the odd road name changed to make them look like they're in touch with your area.

Unfortunately, they aren't.

You see, the claim that Roehampton has experienced large rises in business rates just isn't true - as Miss Greening could have found out for herself by just getting in touch with her own council's Director of Finance (as my campaign team did). So, either she deliberately published claims she knew to be false - or alternatively she's ignorant about an issue she's supposed to understand given her role as Shadow Minister for London. Which is it?

Here are three examples of how businesses in Danebury Avenue - the heart of Roehampton, are affected by the changes in National Non-Domestic Rates.

Roehampton Domestic Store, 47 Danebury Avenue:



Danebury Convenience Store, 53-57 Danebury Avenue:



The Right Plaice Fish & Chip Shop, 59 Danebury Avenue:



Justine Greening is shadow minister for London. Yet she doesn't even seem to know - or worse, perhaps does know and has deliberately misled people - about the impact of business rate revaluation on the most depressed part of her constituency.

Unfortunately, she has form in the misreporting of local facts and figures. Only a few weeks ago I had to point out how she was falsely claiming burglaries in Putney were up when, in fact, burglary rates have declined significantly locally.

Talking down Putney is bad enough. Not knowing what's happening in your own patch is inexcusable. And deliberately misleading voters because the facts don't fit your political point is an example of the tired and discredited politics we need to get rid of in this country.

What a pitiful way to mark 50 years of the Alton

Up until a few days ago, Conservatives in Roehampton were delivering a newsletter containing the story above promoting their dreadful demolition plans for Danebury Avenue. Earlier this week the plans were dropped. Talk about the right hand not knowing what the far right hand is doing!

Particularly notable is the quote from one of the Tory candidates for Roehampton: "We need to make sure that any investment in Roehampton really delivers for our local community."

I agree. What investment HAVE the Conservatives made in Roehampton and what HAS it delivered - REALLY - for our local community? Absolutely nothing.

At the end of four years of broken promises the only people who've benefited have been the printers of the endless, banal, glossy leaflets the council churned out (many of which never seemed to reach residents) and the (two sets of) expensive consultants paid huge amounts of money to tell the Tories that their plans won't work.

They could have saved taxpayers that money and simply taken the word of Roehampton residents, members of the Putney Society, Labour councillors, Roehampton Labour Party, English Heritage, the Conservative Mayor of London, the Wandsworth Cycling Campaign, local businesses and, err, me - all of whom told them this over and over again these past weeks.

A shambles would be too kind a description for the debacle the Conservatives have made here. This has been a folly characterised by ego, arrogance, ignorance and woeful incompetence. Roehampton has had a Tory council for 30 years, Tory councillors for 11 and a Tory MP for four.

We have to hold these hopeless bunglers to account but let's just remember that Roehampton - the most deprived part of our area - is still without any investment, any leadership and any cohesive plan to transform lives on the estate. That's the real cost of the Conservatives' failure.

What a pitiful way for the Tories to mark the fiftieth anniversary of the Alton estate.

The Conservatives just don't get how to fix the street drinker problem

Since I started campaigning for an Alcohol Exclusion Zone for the Alton Estate, the Conservatives have suddenly discovered a concern about the issue of street drinkers.

That's welcome - because it's better to have their support dealing with the problem than their usual apathy and indifference. But the problem is that they simply don't understand what's wrong. And as a result, they're coming up with weak solutions that simply won't sort the problem out.

The Conservatives are talking about "48 hour banning notices" and "good behaviour contracts" - as though that will deter street drinkers. It won't - because these people have an addiction and need help; and anything less than a complete ban on street drinking will simply see them return once those banning orders expire.

The Conservative response is weak - and as usual it's far more about trying to look like they're doing something instead of actually doing something.

My campaign for an Alcohol Exclusion Zone continues: we've got hundreds of supporters already and you too can sign up here.

Nothing less will work. Nothing less than Labour leadership will deliver it.

BREAKING NEWS: Tories finally drop Danebury demolition disaster

The Conservatives have finally bowed to the inevitable and are going to drop their dreadful plans to demolish the top end of Danebury Avenue.

A report going before councillors next Monday, 2nd November, will cite unfavourable economic conditions as the reason for the abandonment of the plans. I wonder whether that's really the reason - it seems to me far more likely that council elections next May would have become a referendum on their plans - and the Tories would certainly have lost.

I'm delighted that, for whatever reason, these calamitous plans have bitten the dust: I've been working hard with residents on the Alton for almost two years to stop these crazy plans and put forward new, affordable and sustainable ideas. We need new ideas that:

* Don't send thousands of cars and articulated lorries down Danebury Avenue
* Don't reduce the amount of affordable homes to rent in the area
* Don't reduce the number of family-sized homes in the area
* Don't concrete over the green in front of Roehampton Library
* Don't threaten Roehampton's local shops by opening a massive supermarket
* Don't close three youth clubs and open just one tiny one in their place

That's not really asking that much. It was only the dogmatic arrogance of Putney's Conservatives who were the ONLY ones supporting these devastating, flawed and deeply unpopular plans, that kept them alive for so long, blighting the lives of so many residents.

I'm delighted to have played my part in bringing this flight of foolishness crashing down.

The Conservatives have wasted years and years endlessly talking about their intention to regenerate Roehampton and they have delivered absolutely nothing. Consultations have been ignored, consultants hired at huge expense to taxpayers have accomplished nothing; not a single life has been transformed for the better; Roehampton remains the most deprived part of the constituency.

This is simply not good enough.

Roehampton has been run by the Conservatives for thirty years: and it's just got worse and worse. It's had Conservative councillors for nearly twelve: and they've achieved exactly nothing for the area - name one thing they've done for you that's made your life better.

If that isn't a more compelling case for change in Roehampton, I don't know what is.

Here's the report that consigns this disaster to the dustbin.