Stuart King for Putney

New Headteacher for Elliott

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 07:52:00 +0000

I very much welcome the appointment of Mark Phillips as the new head of Elliott, and of the wider plans to provide Elliott with much more support from a range of partners including Roehampton University and Burntwood School.

Elliott has already begun to turn around since the difficult Ofsted report last year and the discontent there was among staff with the school's former leadership. And while it's great that Elliott is now part of the Labour Government's Building Schools for the Future programme, which will provide modernised classrooms and buildings alongside the "modernised" school leadership team, it's still a crying shame that the Conservative council waited for so long to apply for this rennovation funding and then made sure it was in the very last tranche of awards for this set of bids.

One thing is clear from my visit to Elliott's Sixth Form Society last Autumn - Elliott's students are a very impressive bunch and I have no doubt that with the right leadership and, in due course, a modernised school building, once again Elliott will be a beacon school for comprehensive education in Putney.

How safe will our NHS be under the Conservatives?

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 07:59:00 +0000

Last year Conservative MEP Dan Hannan became flavour of the month amongst right wing commentators and Conservatives when he poured scorn on the NHS and dismissed it as a sixty year mistake. His party, which earlier that year had worked so hard to get him re-elected to the European Parliament, distanced themselves from him and assured us that he didn't speak for party policy.

More recently it emerged that a Conservative pressure group called Nurses for Reform had secured an hour-long meeting with Conservative leader David Cameron in the House of Commons. Nurses for Reform have branded the NHS a "Soviet-style calamity" and wish to see much greater commercialisation of our health service. Commercialisation is code on the right for "privatisation".

Now it emerges that there are other groups with strong links to the Conservative Party who also despise the NHS. This week the press has widely reported that leaders of the Young Britons Foundation (YBF) have been espousing similarly unsavoury and extreme views about the NHS (and a lot more).

The YBF chief executive, Donal Blaney, has penned an article entitled "Scrap the NHS, not just targets" in which he askes "Would it not now be better to say that the NHS - in its current incarnation - is finished?"

So what has this got to do with Cameron's "Compassionate Conservatives" you might be asking? Well, all these groups have strong links to the senior echelons of the Conservative Party. Indeed, the YBF's ties to the Conservative frontbench are so close that both Conservative Party chairman, Eric Pickles MP, and the shadow defence secretary, Liam Fox MP, spoke at the annual YBF parliamentary rally at the House of Commons, which was chaired by Blaney.

Blaney, incidentally was sacked from being chair of Conservative Future for being too right-wing: quite a feat as anyone who knows the background of the Young Conservative movement will be able to attest.

But with people like Blaney pulling the strings behind the scenes, if the Conservatives win the next election, how safe do you think our NHS will be?

Target cancer

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 11:11:00 +0000

The price of Putney

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:40:00 +0000

Yesterday's Sunday Mirror highlighted how Tory peer Lord Ashcroft used his billions to buy Conservative wins in 19 constituencies - including Putney - at the last general election. You can click on the spread above for a larger version of the article, with Tory Justine Greening and the �14,000 "Cashcroft" channelled to her campaign featured prominently.

It's possible to argue that it wasn't Lord Cashcroft's Belize billions that made Putney Conservative in 2005 - but that's not what the Conservatives think. They clearly believe that cash equals votes, or else flooding the marginal constituencies with overseas contributions wouldn't be the central - almost sole - plank of their election strategy.

Unlike Justine Greening's Putney Conservatives, the only donations I accept are from local residents or people who know me and who want nothing other than a hard-working Labour candidate in return. Because I can't compete with the overseas billionaires and political lobbyists who channel funds to Putney Conservatives - and wouldn't even want to try - if you feel strongly about the Tories buying seats as if they're up for auction to the highest bidder please contribute to my campaign.

You can make a contribution of whatever you can afford via my secure website. I'm the only Putney candidate who can defeat the Tories and their view that elections can be bought, so please show them that while this may be how things get done in Belize, it's not how we do them in Great Britain.

Celebrating Putney

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 15:13:00 +0000

As you'll know if you're a regular visitor to my blog, one of my main criticisms of the local Conservatives is that they take little pride in Putney: as the neglect of our town centre and Putney Bridge, the weak and damaging (lack of) planning policies, the never-ending service cuts and closures, the huge amount of fly-tipping and the woeful state of our roads and pavements exemplify.

It's time for local leadership that celebrates this wonderful area. That's why I've produced ten different sets of Oystercard wallets that exhibit the very best of Putney, Roehampton and Southfields. We have versions for Putney Bridge, St Mary's Church, the Alton Estate, Queen Mary's House, Dover House Road, Southfields tube, East Putney station, the Royal Hospital, Roehampton village and the London Mosque in Gressenhall Road.

If you'd like to show your pride in Putney by carrying one of these Oystercard wallets get in touch and I'll gladly send you one. For free. No catch. 10,000 to give away! Just tell me which version you'd like.

Fundraising WITHOUT a Belize Billionaire

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 07:43:00 +0000

Unlike my Conservative opponent Justine Greening, neither I nor my campaign have ever been the recipient of thousands of pounds in political donations from a non dom billionaire. And I wouldn't want to, either.

Every penny I spend is raised locally - through donations from local Labour Party members and supporters, and through the type of fundraising events that voluntary organisations across the Putney will be familiar with: raffles, quiz nights, social events and - the highlight of the fundraising year - our annual dinner.

On Tuesday evening we again took our annual dinner to the fantastic Telegraph Pub on Putney Heath. The food and service was excellent and the company and conversation even better. Our after dinner speaker was the witty and hugely entertaining political editor of The Mirror, Kevin Maguire. Kevin entertained us with tales from Westminster and - in the most noble of dinner guest speaker traditions, declined the raffle prize when his ticket was pulled from the hat (three times no less!).

It was a welcome (albeit brief) break from the campaign trail and I was particularly pleased to see so many members who have been working so hard on behalf of both me and Putney Labour party. As the recipient of that hard work, effort and endeavour (as well as their financial donations), I can tell you it is a richer reward than all of Ashcroft's billions.

We must now know whether Ashcroft's donations were legal

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 20:31:00 +0000

Yesterday's disclosure that Lord Ashcroft: the Conservative Party's biggest donor - possibly the biggest donor to a political party of all time - isn't a domiciled British taxpayer and doesn't pay the same taxes as you and me, isn't exactly revelatory. After all, the Conservatives wouldn't have gone through four different leaders all refusing to reveal his tax status if it had been above board, would they?

But what this confession does do is pile pressure on the Electoral Commission to complete its investigation into Ashcroft's company: Bearwood Corporate Services, and publish its findings before the general election is called.

I explained the background in a post in January here - simply put, if Bearwood is nothing more than a front for Ashcroft and not a genuine company trading in the UK the donations it has channelled direct from his home in the Caribbean to Tory Party coffers will be illegal contributions. That's over �3 million nationally and over �19,000 that have gone to Putney Conservatives.

As I said at the start, no one who believed Lord Ashcroft's status was beyond reproach would go to the lengths the Conservatives have to avoid acknowledging it. The Electoral Commission must now rule on this, and if they find Justine Greening's Putney party took �19,000 from Ashcroft illegally, that money must be paid back to taxpayers pronto.

Weekend casework

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 07:54:00 +0000

Here are some of the issues I've been working on sorting out this week. There are just two points I want to make about this. The first is that some of these are issues I reported last year - and which I got fixed but are now in a poor way again; and the second is that these are all problems in and around just one medium-sized estate: the Orchard estate in West Hill.

My point is this: just consider how many problems there must be throughout Putney, Roehampton and Southfields which your Conservative MP and councillors are just ignoring or can't be bothered to fix.

The Conservatives are right that 2010 needs to be a year of change: in Putney that change is Labour.

The pavements in Linstead Way are dreadful - and they've been dreadful for years under the Tories.

Damaged banisters in Linstead Way which leave these dangerous metal spokes in an area full of young families.

It just wouldn't be Tory Wandsworth without some shocking potholes - these on the slope from Beaumont Road to Linstead Way, past Andrew Reed House

Only last November I finally got the council to fix these railings along the path from Beaumont Road to Royal Orchard Close. They've been vandalised already - mainly because on one side this is a convenient cut-through to Linstead Way. So we either need more substantial railings or a designated, safe path with steps down the slope.

The bollards like those on the other side of this raised crossing by Castlecombe Drive have somehow vanished, leaving two craters in the Beaumont Road pavement.

Bridge debacle

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 14:53:00 +0000

You have to admire Conservative chutzpah, if nothing else.

The Tory London Assembly member for our area has been sending out letters to the press complaining about the closure of so many of London's bridges at the same time: Albert Bridge and Hammersmith Bridge being two of the five in the capital that are closed currently.

That's of local concern to Putney because not only does it mean extra traffic through Putney's already congested main roads, but because it means that much-needed resurfacing work to Putney Bridge cannot begin - and a Conservative cabinet member here has admitted that much on the local community website. That, incidentally, might mean no work for another 18 months - the time Albert Bridge will be closed.

I'm delighted our London Assembly member's belief has been beggered, but he's curiously forgotten that the body in charge of deciding when roadworks to London's bridges takes place, Transport for London, is under the control of the (Conservative) Mayor of London and the London Assembly where we're represented by this same Conservative member who seems to be passing it off as "nothing to do with me guv".

Leadership's about taking responsibility. Show some.

'Self' defeating

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 10:28:00 +0000

I've written before about this Southfields case I've been very heavily involved with, but this week's story in the Wandsworth Guardian underlines how badly I feel the Conservatives treat those residents who need services above and beyond the majority of us experience.

As with so many of these stories, the council's peremptory, dismissive reply is usually the last word. Just re-read it from the story above: "In order to qualify for a disabled badge the applicant must have a degree of disability and find it difficult to walk. Fortunately Mrs Self does not have any such problems."

For heaven's sake! She has angina, heart disease, is partially blind AND suffers from Meniere's Disease, which is an inbalance within the ears that prevents her from walking! The only reason she (purportedly) failed the council's test at the town hall - a test so stressful she had an angina attack in the town hall foyer - was that the occupational therapist failed to test her walking unsupported by her husband.

The problem the council gets itself into is the second part of their quote above. After all, they're categorical in the sentence I quoted: that Mrs Self is not eligible for a blue badge. That being the case, why would a council certain of its case offer a repeat assessment? It's not common practice: in fact its abnormal.

This is a Conservative council that refuses to back down when it gets things wrong and would rather pick on an elderly lady in her eighties than accept that they made a mistake. They've even written to us telling us they will not enter into any further correspondence with us unless it is to accept the re-assessment offer.

But why should the family put their mum through such an ordeal again? I'm not sure I'd want my mother to endure such a stressful experience a second time, even if it is for something that will make her life immeasurably easier if she ever, eventually, were to get it. That's the call Mrs Self's family have made and I respect them for it.

I can't say the same for the Conservative council.

Election 1950 in the Wandsworth Guardian

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 14:45:00 +0000

That very small percentage of you who don't love the blanket media coverage of politics we get during general elections only have a few more weeks of bliss before the Prime Minister is expected to dissolve parliament.

The story above from last week's Wandsworth Guardian is from the 1950 General Election campaign - and without wishing to be accused of precisely the same things the article accuses those candidates of, I very much hope that the 1950 election result will be one we emulate come polling day!

Of course there's a reason why all political candidates say they're going to win - even Labour candidates in the most true-blue constituencies around and Conservatives in rock-solid Labour communities: we need to maximise our vote, and telling them we're going to lose is hardly going to motivate them to take the trip down to the polling station. Some of these candidates even convince themselves that they're actually going to win even though they've done very little to justify their (re) election.

Anyway, I hope this trip down memory lane amuses you.

Signing up to the Cancer Commitment

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 09:13:00 +0000

Recently I signed up to Cancer Research UK's Cancer Commitment, which aims to make UK cancer outcomes among the best in Europe in the next ten years.

Cancer remains the public's number one fear. With a concerted effort from the next Parliament, I am sure we can give hope to the millions of people affected by cancer and their friends and family.

More than one in three people in Putney will develop some form of cancer during their lifetime. My own family - like many - has been touched by cancer. In the last thirty years, the UK's 10-year survival rates have doubled but cancer survival rates still lag behind the best performing countries in Europe such as Sweden, Norway and Finland.

The Cancer Commitment calls on MPs in the next Parliament to take action in five key areas:

� Detecting cancer earlier
� Providing world class treatment
� Preventing more cancers
� Tackling cancer inequalities
� Protecting the UK?s research base

For information on Cancer Research UK?s Commit To Beat Cancer campaign, visit: http://www.committobeatcancer.org/

My plan for Putney

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 07:40:00 +0000

Since December the Conservative-run council has been consulting on what is, effectively, a planning brief for key sites across the borough. Sites include those we've spent a lot of time on these past few years: Tileman House, Putney Place, the Riverside Quarter and Danebury Avenue, for example.

This the closest thing the Conservatives get to putting together a comprehensive plan for Putney - something I've been arguing for since 2003. But it is not a plan in itself. Here are the remaining steps needed to give us that plan.

1. A real plan

First, this document is informative but it is not genuine site-specific planning policy. That's because the planning policy governing these sites isn't new or site-specific: it's the same blanket planning policy that exists now. So pretty much every briefing on each specific site in Putney talks about exactly the same building heights being allowed. That's not site specific - it's general.

2. Cast-iron guarantees

Second, the plan constantly refers to buildings of more than twelve storeys only being given permission in "exceptional circumstances". But what is ?exceptional?? The Tileman House developers are appealing the refusal of their 16-storey block because they believe their building is exceptional. The design for Putney Place, rejected in 2008, could be regarded as exceptional by some. And just one exception could become the rule because of precedent: the planning rule that says that once one building of a particular type or scale has been approved that sets the benchmark for future development.

3. A comprehensive plan

Third, looking at specific sites in isolation isn't a comprehensive plan. Putney High Street, for example, is a poor quality environment that will only be radically improved if we have a planning framework that looks at it in its entirety - not just the three sites that have been identified (which are the Putney Cinema/Jubilee House block; the block on the corner of Putney Bridge Road where the Real Greek is; and the hideous block between Lacy and Felsham Roads where TK-Maxx now is, that I've already published an alternative plan for).

We need consistent design the length of the high street to improve the overall shopping environment; to tackle the pollution that makes Putney's high street the worst in London, to diversify the shops and make sure different use-types are better spread throughout the town centre and to give pedestrians more priority.

4. A clear vision of how Putney should evolve

And finally we need to have the political leadership to debate, not duck the controversial issue of capacity. One of the big problems with the Putney Place development was that East Putney station is already full to capacity. So is Putney Station. Our local schools are expanding because their capacity is being reached. Our major roads are often gridlocked because they are full beyond capacity. The only way Putney can handle an increased population of the scale the Conservatives seem to want will be for massive investment in improved infrastructure: and that's simply not on the cards.

We also cannot duck the fact that while it is Putney's character that makes developers want to build huge amounts of extra homes in the area, were we to succumb to their overdevelopment plans the very character that makes Putney a target for development would be changed significantly - perhaps beyond recognition.

Now that's not an argument for mothballing Putney; for never allowing any development here ever again; to try to freeze our area in time. But there are clearly two entirely incompatible agendas for Putney here: the Conservatives that believe skyscraper development in Putney is not only inevitable but desirable - and my Labour view that Putney's character is not high-rise but human scale and that this is the constraint any future development needs to operate within.

It's a straightforward difference of opinion between the Tory MP and her 18 Tory councillors in Putney, and me. You get to choose which side you stand on at the elections later this year. But be in no doubt: if the Conservatives win, their vision of Putney will be writ large - irreversably -by the time the next elections come around.

You can read my formal submission to the council here.

More action: Durford Crescent

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 14:32:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 08:16:00 +0000

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.

Once, twice and three times no

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 14:14:00 +0000

The Conservative council has, for at least the third time in recent years rejected my request for them to take the voting rights of students at Roehampton University more seriously.

I asked the council to establish a specific polling district for students based at Roehampton Students Union instead of making them walk more than a mile to their current polling station on the Lennox estate. The Tory council refused.

I asked the council to trial an early voting pilot scheme, which would mean that students could cast their votes over a period of time before polling day. The Tory council refused.

I even asked them to simply make sure they prioritise registering students in broadly the same numbers everyone else is; and to really seriously encourage students to vote by post. The Tory council refused. Barely half the number of students in halls on Roehampton's campus are registered to vote as of today, with huge gaps in the Mount Clare campus in particular.

I start from the very simple proposition that everyone should have equal opportunity to cast a vote in this year's election. Students, whether because they don't feel sufficiently engaged in the local area, or because they have barriers placed between them and voting by the Conservative council, are not getting that equal opportunity.

Yes, students tend to be a more apathetic group than mainstream voters, but it's not the case that they are less interested in politics. Turnout from the university is so much lower than that for other universities of a similar size that there has to be a reason for it. To dismiss this problem so easily is to dismiss students as having as much of a right to a say as any other Putney elector.

That's the local Conservative view of students. It certainly isn't mine.

Estate gardens

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 08:39:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 21:04:00 +0000

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

Pigeons

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 07:44:00 +0000

Don't these photos, sent in by a local resident sick of the state of Putney High Street, just epitomise what's wrong with it?

This is the healthy living shop on the corner of Disraeli Road: but there's nothing healthy about the state these pigeons are leaving the shopfront in.

I've asked the council to locate and contact the landlords of the site to get them to tackle the problem - and if they won't do anything for pest control to be carried out and recharged to them.

This is about taking pride in our town centre. How can we expect to tackle the big things wrong with the High Street when the Conservatives can't be bothered to even fix the little blights, like this?

28 Bus petition sent to Boris

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:37:00 +0000

In the picture above I'm handing in the 100 28 Bus petitions I've collected from the small corner of my constituency alone to the London Assembly. Labour London Assembly member Val Shawcross, who chairs the assembly's transport committee will submit the petition officially at the next assembly session so that Boris Johnson has to respond.

Given that only a tiny section of Putney would be directly affected by the loss of the 28, the response has been great. The thing that's become clear to me is just how important this bus is to the area: there are so many people, a lot of them elderly, who rely on this service to get them into Fulham, Notting Hill and Kensal Green.

I'll let you know what the Mayor of London, who according to today's Evening Standard thinks he has a "divine right" to be Prime Minister, says. With such lofty ambitions it must be tiresome for him to have to respond to ordinary people about bread-and-butter issues for them like their local bus service. But respond he'll now be obliged to.

Weekend casework

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 08:28:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 10:00:00 +0000

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.

Tories' final blow to Whitelands parking need

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 09:17:00 +0000

The Conservative council is to press ahead with plans to deny any parking to residents of the Whitelands Park estate off Sutherland Grove, disregarding the views of hundreds of local people who asked them for help.

Imagine if you were told you weren't allowed to park on the public highway anywhere near your home. Imagine you had no off-street parking space. Imagine living about a mile from your nearest tube station. Imagine - you may not need to - that your car isn't just a luxury but a necessity because you work shifts that mean leaving for or returning from work when public transport isn't running. You'd justifiably feel betrayed and angry about a Conservative council that has done just that:

It was the Conservatives that allowed over 100 apartments on Whitelands Park to be built without any parking, despite not being in an area of high public transport accessibility
It was the Conservatives that failed to impose a condition on the developer of Whitelands Park to allow these residents to park on the private road (Scott Avenue) through the estate
It was the Conservatives that then tried to sneak in a parking zone without even consulting the residents
It was the Conservatives who have been going round blaming everyone else for their mistakes, trying to play an unseemly divide-and-rule, turf war politics that cause anger and bitterness that won't easily be resolved
And it's now the Conservatives banning them from parking anywhere near their homes on the public highway.

Incompetence and vindictiveness rarely deliver good public policy-making, and while I support the introduction of the Sutherland Grove area controlled parking zone, there is so much more the council could have done to help residents of Whitelands without harming the CPZ.

One of the simplest was the idea to exclude the stretch of Sutherland Grove immediately opposite Whitelands Park, where there are no other homes, from the parking zone so that at least there would be 20 or so unrestricted parking bays for anyone - including Whitelands residents - to use.

That would give the residents of Sutherland Grove the controlled parking zone they want and deserve; it would not mean Whitelands residents getting parking permits within the zone itself (something the Sutherland Grove residents strongly oppose); and it would at least give Whitelands residents some chance of parking somewhere close to their homes in a stretch of road with no other residents around it.

This isn't a perfect solution: Conservative mistake after mistake has made sure we'll never get that now, but it is the fairest and most just outcome for both Sutherland Grove and Whitelands Park. The essence of public service is reaching such compromises and getting the best deal for all our constituents. The Conservatives have shown they're simply not up to it with this litany of wrong decisions and divide-and-rule politics that has - entirely unnecessarily - set residents against residents.

What a pathetic lack of leadership.

St John's goes electric

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 14:55:00 +0000

St John's Avenue is going to be one of the first roads in the borough to get some electric car charging points installed.

The power points - funded by the Labour Government, which will be located near the junction with Putney Hill, outside Hill Court, will enable up to two cars to recharge. The electricity will be free to the car user, but as the power points will be based beside two pay-and-display parking bays and it takes 3 hours to fully recharge a vehicle the council will seemingly end up making a substantial profit from each point.

There are already electric power points at Putney Leisure Centre,

My only criticism of the scheme is that, as usual, the Conservative council is trying to overclaim the significance of this scheme. Two electric vehicle charge points are not going to transform the pollution blight in Putney town centre and it's therefore faintly absurd to dress this positive step forward as anything more than a very small step in the right direction.

It's great that our Labour government is funding the set-up costs for power points, because it's quite clear we'd have none if the Conservative council had to fund the installation off its own back.

We need vastly more charge points throughout Putney in order to start making substantial cuts in NOx emissions - something I called for back in the 2009 budget and which I'll work hard on as Putney's MP. At the very least I believe every petrol station should provide power points for electric cars and in due course wouldn't it be nice to see petrol pumps being replaced by power points?

Tories cut Wandsworth Police by 6%

noreply@blogger.com (Stuart King) — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 07:41:00 +0000

When the reports started to emerge last year about the sheer scale of the Conservatives' cuts to policing in London, as reported by the Evening Standard, the numbers were so vast that it was hard to appreciate what they mean for areas like ours.

But at this week's Crime and Disorder Partnership meeting, Borough Police Commander Stewart Low revealed for the first time what those cuts mean for Putney: a 6% cut in the Wandsworth police force budget this coming year.

Commendably, our police leadership is guaranteeing no cuts in our safer neighbourhood police teams: something that may be achievable for one year, but as Conservative cuts keep being made year-in, year-out (as they promise), this will become untenable.

Let's just put in context what a 6% cut represents. 6% is the equivalent of 37 police officers. It's not a small cut: it's a deep cut that attacks the effectiveness of our local police, who have delivered big falls in crime throughout Putney.

This is how the Conservatives reward success. It's exactly what they did in the 1990s when they were last in charge of police funding. If you vote the Conservatives into power later this year, they'll keep doing it.