Lack of activity

I’m really sorry about the lack of activity during the past week or so. I’ve been so busy with wedding preparations, various evening meetings and doing my CIPR diploma that it’s been difficult to find the time in the evening to update. I have a mock Critical Reasoning Test in at the beginning of next week that I’m frantically reading up for at the moment. It’s all interesting stuff about persuasion and the nature of public relations but I’m struggling to fit much else in, especially now the garden is getting going again (our lounge table is covered in seed propagators).

There are a couple of things that are ongoing – notably that I will be involved in a LDF Character Study meeting on March 25 on behalf of Horsell Residents’ Association. Further details will follow.

In addition, on St Patrick’s Day (March 17) I will be splitting my time between the HRA management committee and a Tune In event at HG Wells. My understanding is that’s it’s open to all, so why not come along?

I am trying to keep up with everything on Twitter, which is less time-consuming and can be done throughout the day. Why not follow me if you don’t already?

Shopping Centre cardinal to Woking economy

Earlier today, Woking Borough Council officially announced that it had purchased Wolsey Place Shopping Centre following a decision on February 2 to become sole owners. The cost is £68million, which has been financed by the Public Works Loan Board.

The aim of the purchase is twofold – to invest in an asset that will both appreciate in time and generate a healthy £1.5m every year for the council and to play a pro-active role in encouraging economic growth in the town - in this case by securing the future of a major retail space. There are, it must be stressed, no plans for the council to run the centre, this will remain with existing staff.

There will no doubt be those that criticise the council for taking on more borrowing. They will stand on the fact that Woking has borrowed more than almost any other district council and that this somehow indicates financial imcompetence. Not so. The act of investing in tangible assets on a long-term basis and generating net profits from those investments is using borrowing as a force for good. I won’t defend all of the projects WBC has invested – and I favour a debt-free position – but in this case, one has to consider the broader interests of Woking in the future.

The nature of local government finances has changed. No longer are councils about revenue income, support grants, non-domestic rates and council tax versus costs – they have a wider, enabling role to play through investment in communities. We aren’t the only council looking to be more pro-active economically. Surrey Heath has got pro-active with The Atrium development and there are other options for the future. Runnymede redeveloped its Civic Centre and Guildford has worked to improve its Civic Hall and Friary Centre infrastructure for years.

The difference is that we have already gone into the market while the money is cheap and we are ahead of the curve – as suggested by the fact that the Liberal Democrats also backed the purchase of the centre. I’m pleased we’ve got a consensus on this and hope it survives the election intact.

Traditional local government finance will fade out as more and more cuts have to be made and councils look to other means of raising revenue. Outsourcing only gets you so far and is politically challengingfar better to invest cheaply in strategic assets that will generate multiple benefits for both residents and the council.

Carthouse Lane Allotments part II

I did say that I would return to the subject of the Carthouse Lane Allotments, although the target date for this application is not until the middle of February. It won’t be heard at the planning meeting on Tuesday – the agenda for that is now published.

Horsell Residents Association met on Wednesday evening and briefly discussed the application. There were concerns about how allotments and warehouses could be built in close proximity to the Special Protection Area when homes themselves were restricted. This all stems to a useless EU directive that is designed to protect nightjars and Dartford Warblers in southern Spain but has wrecked the housing plans of local authorities throughout the Thames Valley.

Put simply, people keep pets and walk them near where they live. It is those dogs and cats that cause a potential hazard to the habitat of ground-nesting birds and the birds themselves. By comparison, a warehouse or industrial unit creates no similar threat. It’s a completely ridiculous directive but there we go.

The general consensus at HRA was that the application itself is no bad thing, even if it did highlight the silliness of the EU law.

We’re going to the chapel

Back in the spring of 2007, I watched Francis Maude give one of the most unimpressive performances on Question Time that I’ve ever seen. The background for this was the announcement that the Conservative Party intended to commit to the idea of rewarding married couples through the taxation system. His answers were defensive and and a little condescending and I held my head in my hands as the Conservative Party once again went back to basics.

Even back then, I knew that just as the original back to basics had started the decline of John Major’s government, so the new version – despite its different presentation – could seriously damage a future Conservative challenge; people don’t want to be told how to live. And now the issue is back in the news - not because it’s new but because given everything that has happened since St David’s Day 2007, Labour feels that the Conservatives are vulnerable on this issue – and they are dead right.

I’m not against marriage – heck, I’m getting married in June. I’m not even going to argue with the fact that marriage is a preferable institution from which to create a stable family unit. I’m not arguing that kids from married families statiscally don’t do better at school and stay out of trouble. Marriage is the most important building block of our society and we disregard it at our peril.

But marriage is not a magic wand – it is a means to an end. Marriages create stability, continuity and an environment of care, which is why it is so good at nurture and creating stable and balanced households. But it doesn’t have a monopoly on love, stability and care. There are plenty of co-habitees, single parents and same-sex relationships that provide exactly the same environment. Equally, there are plenty of marriages that provide very little in the way of any of these positive things.

My problem with the Conservative policy of rewarding marriage in the tax system is that it alienates people who don’t fall into this category, many through no fault of their own. The break-up of any marriage is always a tragic and deeply traumatic event, particularly when there are children involved. But it happens – sometimes people who fell in love with all good faith simply fall out of love, or fall more in love with someone else. It’s one of the most difficult things about being human – but being human is all that it is.

I feel very uncomfortable about levvying a financial penalty against those involved in such a sad chapter of their lives – even though to them it would no doubt pale into insignficance compared to everything else. To me, it smacks of kicking people while they are down, of turning our backs on them when they need support most and of keeping a whole lot of other people, many of whom will be relatively vulnerable, off a list of “the favoured” because they – for whatever reason – cannot or don’t wish to embrace a formal marriage arrangement.

I understand what the Conservative Party is trying to do here – but it’s all wrong. It allows our opponents to paint us as an exclusive party – as if we didn’t have enough trouble with that already. I seriously don’t want the Tory Party to be the party of the rich – I want it to be the party that leaves the rich alone, looks after the poor and increases mobility from poor to rich. But it’s difficult to get that inclusive idea across when you illustrate it with policies like this one.

And the party only has itself to blame. By trying, in the spring of 2007, to impose its grass roots’ preferred way of living, we have been overtaken by circumstances to a point where we are left with a policy that DC would probably reverse in an instant if he could – he’s already tried and then had to go back on himself - but can’t. Despite the recession, despite the sensitive issue that taxation policy has now become, he cannot go back on the marriage promise for fear of losing grass roots votes and another Lisbon-like U-turn. On one side his better judgement, on the other ConservativeHome and the Daily Mail. Rather him than me.

It’s what happens when you announce things three years ahead of an election. Okay, there’s nothing wrong with supporting marriage but I’ll bet that if DC could choose something now that he’d announced in 2007, it wouldn’t be this.

The Conservative Party must support people, not institutions if we wish to remain on the centre ground.

Need for less speed

On Monday evening, I hosted Horsell Village Horsell Trustees and this clashed with both the Conservative group meeting and the Christmas panel meeting for Horsell of Surrey Police. I did however pop along to the first 25 minutes of the latter before dashing back home for HVH because I think it is important to know what the policing issues are.

The panel consists of PC Josh Parish, our excellent neighbourhood officer, PSCO Kimberley Muir who I don’t know that well but I have seen out patrolling in the village quite a lot and Kate Wilson, Woking Borough Council’s neighbourhood officer. Josh spoke a bit about problems of parking near the C of E school around rush hour and about how he and Kimberley had been moving inconsiderately parking vehicles on – to mixed reaction. Plans are afoot to strengthen this measure.

He also mentioned the anti-burglary operation that Surrey Police has been carrying out, the reason that he knocked on my door a few weeks ago. Questions from the floor were almost exclusively about speeding, whether it be along Chobham Road, Brewery Road or down side streets. It certainly seems to be a problem and on Brewery Road I know of at least one recent incident where damage was caused by an accident.

The Speedwatch programme is an excellent scheme but not to everyone’s taste. I guess it depends on your views on speeding – my view is that communities have to take responsibility and that training them up to issue warnings to speeding drivers is a natural application of this principle. Drivers don’t have the right to speed just because they think that they can handle it – while it is annoying to be picked up for doing just over the speed limit, unfortunately for many dangerous drivers speed is a key identifier.

I would train up for the scheme but cannot see how I would have the time to participate at the moment. We need less speeding in Horsell because of the busy and crammed nature of our village. There are too many people around, a lot of them children, to take risks. Horsell can easily be bypassed for those trying to get elsewhere in a hurry – there is no excuse for them to coming racing through the village.

What you make it

Another furiously busy long weekend. I spent most of Friday working on campaign items, followed by a branch meeting of Horsell and Woodham in the evening. Yesterday, my other half and I spent most of the day in the kitchen – more of which later – followed by helping out and attending the Carol Concert at Horsell Village Hall. Today, we have presented the fruits of our kitchen labours at the Horsell and Woodham Conservatives Christmas Lunch, which as fundraising and membership vice-chairman, I have organised.

So another wonderfully “Horselly” weekend. The Mosaic Choir was absolutely fantastic yesterday evening and sung with great competence and wit. A number of their pieces were modern alternatives to traditional favourites and the version of 12 Days of Christmas was very funny. The event raised a great deal of money for Woking Lions and Horsell Village Hall and we have to recognise the efforts of Dorothy Smith, Penny Kramer and Roger Chamberlain from the HVH side, along with Janice Worgan.

Party events are perhaps slightly less worthy from a general point of view but raise funds for the political process, which however cynical one may be about it is at least better than no political process at all. My other half and I spent yesterday making various desserts to cater for the 35 people who turned up to support us today. Cllrs Anne Murray and Mike Smith provided the main course and Jonathan Lord attended a Horsell event yet again, showing his continuing commitment to support activists at every level as they support him. I’ve said before that I’m lucky to have a great branch behind my campaign – it can’t be overstated.

There isn’t a particular point to this post other than to note what a great pleasure it is to have such a full diary and meet so many good people who support these events – both political and non-political. Where you live is what you make it, something it is heartening that so people in Horsell understand.

My left footpath

I really did have an unpleasant journey walking back from work on Wednesday evening. My route takes me back through Woking Town Square, past the council offices and over into the Brewery Road Car Park. From there, I go up Chobham Road and cut through Wheatsheaf Road/Orchard Drive onto Grange Road. But on Wednesday it had been raining heavily – and still was – and the whole area of Brewery Road by the car park entrance was flooded and under about three inches of water (that’s a whole different post!).

Instead of walking back and trying a different route on to Chobham Road, I decided to use the footpath that heads up past the Pegasus and behind the Broomhalls and on to Horsell Park. But on Wednesday it was also under a good inch of water in most places. There was precious little lighting – I was focussed on finding my way out half way up Chobham Road  but only remember the moon as any form of indication as to where the puddles were – and absolutely no signage to tell anyone unfamiliar with the path where they were going or where the severall branches led to.

I’ve been up the footpath before but in the squalling rain and dark I couldn’t make out which turn to take and eventually ended up in The Larches. Fortunately, my knowledge of the area is sufficient to know where that is but not everyone would do. Nor would everyone’s eyesight necessarily be up to negotiating the footpath in that state of darkness. In addition I’m able, as a last resort, to simply wade through the floods if necessary without anything more than temporary discomfort. But for some, getting their feet wet in dirty water is not an option to take if at all possible.

So I’ve been speaking to borough councillor Beryl Hunwicks, who has raised the issue of lighting along there before. We are going to check the lighting and signage because if we are to encouage people from Horsell to walk to work or the station rather than using the car, we need to make the footpaths safe, comfortable and practical. Maybe it’s just me but my experience on Wednesday wasn’t any of those things.

Community action

How do we get the improvements we want for the village

How do we get the improvements we want for the village?

I spent around half an hour today speaking to a Horsell activist of another political persuasion who has in the past been successful in getting things done in the village. I won’t name her to prevent embarrassment (although if she visits the site she is more than welcome to post a comment confirming her identity). The reason I’m telling you this is because although it’s something I’ve thought about in the past – and committed to print as editor of The Resident - I wouldn’t want to take all the credit for this post.

We spoke about the responsibility of a community to take action to achieve the things it wants to get done rather than relying on the local authority to provide it to them. It’s not always a popular messagewhat on earth do we pay our council tax for, I hear you reply – but the truth is that if people have a vision for how their area should look, what services they want to see there and how these should be delivered, it is in these times up to them to do something about it.

I wrote in the The Resident that government would likely become ever more remote as councils merge and powers pass higher up the chain. I said that communities like Horsell would be left to take responsibility for their own care organisations, village facilities and for creating their own visions of the future. It was the latter point that we particularly spoke about today, especially in light of the Local Development Framework that I have written about before.

Should we simply stand by, answer the council’s consultation and allow the officers of the council, in consultation with the government and our elected members to map out our village’s future for us? Or should we rather create our own vision for what we want and task our councillors with fighting in council for that vision, regardless of convention perameters? And whose vision should it be – is it possible for Horsell residents to agree on enough to have a single vision of what we want our community to be?

We are blessed with good schools and shops in Horsell, as well as effectively our own town centre car park in Brewery Road. We also have a myriad of superb organisations from Scouts and Guides to allotments and amateur drama – all run and organised by generous, dynamic and selfless volunteers.

It’s not a question to which I have an answer but here is the heart of it – just how far are we personally prepared to go to make Horsell what we want it to be? It is often only when authorities are seen to make a mess of things that people begin to ask themselves that question and find a favourable answer. How much more could we achieve by asking it of ourselves on our own terms?

Visit from the police

We're lucky to have PC Josh Parish in Horsel

We're lucky to have PC Josh Parish in Horsell

No, not like that - sorry to disappoint. PC Josh Parish knocked on my door about half an hour ago while I was emptying the dishwasher (good job I didn’t have the meat cleaver in my hand when I opened the door) and just wanted to pass across details of the Safer Neighbourhood Policing Team in Horsell, which is basically him and PCSO Kimberley Muir.

I’d be stretching it a bit if I said that I regularly see Josh patrolling these parts but then I’m not here all the time and I know from my experience elsewhere that Surrey Police faces a struggle against budgetary constraints to provide the presence they’d ideally like. Josh and Kimberley can’t be everywhere all the time and they do a very good job for the village – attending HRA meetings when they can, working with councillors and making an effort to communicate with residents to get to the heart of problems before they get out of control.

Around Grange Road, I have to say that we have almost no trouble at all but I’m told that there have been a couple of burglaries in the area of late, which given the time of year and the nature of the area is not hugely surprising. It’s good advice to residents across Horsell as the nights draw in – make sure your windows are closed and preferrably locked, that gates are secured and valuable goods not left in sight. Use your alarm if you have one and if you don’t have one think about it -  we paid £600 for ours a year ago and while it’s not a small sum, you’ll gladly pay it to get your sentimental items back if you fall victim to these people.

Burglars are often real professionals and they can sweep through a house, pick out the valuable, re-sellable items and get out again in under 10 minutes before your neighbours are even aware they have arrived. The vast majority are highly opportunistic and attracted by open windows, doors, loosely secured entry points and obvious means of easy escape. Don’t get scared; get secured and do everything you can to make your house a risky proposition for them.

I’m grateful to Josh for dropping round to point out an open window on our out-house – while there’s nothing of value in there anyway because it’s unsecure even with the window closed, I’ll be closing it tomorrow so it doesn’t give any unwelcome observers an invitation to visit that they don’t deserve.

A grand mysterious harmony

It's all peace and tranquility in the council tonight

It's all peace and tranquility in the council tonight

The executive committee tonight was a relatively tame affair and it will be interesting to see whether any sparks fly at the full council meeting on December 10. The fees and charges are always a contentious issue and there were a few murmurs tonight but I thought the most interesting part of that debate was something that won’t catch headlines like parking or leisure centre charges.

Section 4.16 of the report talks about provision for Looked After Children. These are of course the children in Surrey County Council care - either directly or via Foster Carers – who become so for a variety of reasons including abuse, illness or disability but all whom are taken into care because their families - who so many of us take for granted will always be there for us - are unable to fulfill their normal function of nurture. For obvious reasons, their opportunities are reduced compared to others, despite the many good efforts of foster carers and social workers.

Liberal Democrat leader Ian Johnson pointed out the provision that the borough council currently makes to children in this position. Even though social care is a Surrey County Council responsibility, Woking Borough Council is a partner in the Surrey Children and Young People’s Plan and offers free swimming, Key Cards and gym inductions. But these benefits only last until young people reach 19, at which point they considered adults and no longer under the care of the local authority.

Cllr Johnson said:

“I would like to think that in areas such as housing we can extend the care in this paper. These are people who have had a pretty rotten start in life and we ought to be supporting them in other ways and not just cut them off at 19.”

I’m delighted to say that his sentiments were shared by deputy council leader David Bittleston, who said the point was important and needed to be looked at. It is vital that if we are to promote opportunity and real equality in this country that rather than simply capping the aspirations of higher-performing children or creating a huge gap between the independent and public schooling systems, we must give children from inauspicious background the opportunity early to understand they can take control of their lives in a positive way.

Too often the cycle of abuse, neglect and care home childhood is replicated in future generations. We need to break that cycle – and we also need local politicians who understand that government will give them the tools to do so but can’t actually do it for them. It’s nice to see that the Conservatives in Surrey County Council understand that with their plan and it’s nice to see the Liberal Democrats in Woking putting issues of concern before a political opportunity to grab a headline.

I hope that we can work together will the Lib Dems on this to achieve better lives for some of the least fortunate in our borough.