Harmony in Trafford?

Tuesday

Meeting of Community Activists at Urmston Library
Poorly attended and I left early before the drumming started. (don’t ask..)

Wednesday

Meeting of Full Council
I asked a pre-notified question on staffing.

At the beginning of the last financial year, Trafford had the equivalent of 3,175 full time staff including agency workers. It now has 2,796. An equivalent of one in 9 staff has left the workforce. At the same time, much of the workforce has been preparing for a massive upheaval / decant to the Quays.

No organisation is exempt from change, and I’m not going to present a Luddite argument against modernisation or indeed efficiencies. However, no one can deny that the capacity for ‘Change’ has a ceiling. If a team is in a constant state of upheaval, there’s inevitably a cost in productivity.

I spoke to one member of middle management at Trafford recently who’d had three changes to his job title and responsibilities in four months.

To be fair he’d coped well, but you could see a growing frustration that he was not being able to bed-in changes to his role before they were changed again. Multiply the changes across a thousand members of staff and it begins to place a brake on output.

Now again to be fair, I’ve been extremely impressed with aspects of service maintenance during this transition. I had cause to pass on positive comments from a member of public only last week. It’s clear many areas of the organisation are coping well, but some are clearly creaking and there’s been times where it’s been difficult.

The cuts will keep coming, we know that and we’ll have to adapt, but if we’re not careful, we could see the impact being far greater if we pass a point beyond which the management and staff simply cannot cope with the rate of change.

High Speed Rail

We also had a debate on High Speed Rail. I’d drafted a motion on behalf of the Labour Group and the Conservatives had submitted a similar motion in support. My inclusion of words crediting the Labour Government with initiating the project upset the Conservatives and spiced up the debate nicely. I was happy to withdraw the offending words and both resolutions were passed. I noticed the Advertiser reporter suggested that peace and harmony had broken out. I wouldn’t go that far but it was a much better debate than might have been anticipated.

Any peace and harmony was broken with the Conservative resolution on Stretford High / Gorse Hill Park. As I predicted we had the political bun fight. Hopefully the community will still have a say and voice concerns. This resolution didn’t help that dialogue and I wish it had not been tabled.

Thursday

Old Trafford Youth Club to listen to the young people about the fantastic work that goes on there. Brilliant

Friday

Transport for Greater Manchester Committee
Mainly straight forward, although there’s a recommendation for an extra four car train from Liverpool Lime Street to Manchester Oxford Road in the morning peak to abstract passengers from along the entire route and to remove intermediate stops from inter urban services to manage demand.

Now I’ve no idea what they mean and the officer, wasn’t sure either. I suspect it means a stopping train in the morning rush hour, but the loss of express trains stopping in Urmston and certain other stations along the route. If Urmston loses some access, it places more demand on the commuting trains which are already full by the time they reach Trafford Park Station. So I need to confirm whether the four car stopping train adds to capacity at Trafford Park and Humphrey Park or reduces it. So I’ve got a little homework.

And finally

I’ve posted the draft road resurfacing schedule on the roads page of the website. Pleased that Gorse Hill ward is well represented amongst those on the schedule; and pleased that all four of the roads I championed have been included. No guarantee that there won’t be changes as the year progresses but it’s a good start. I know there’s areas in Lostock that are pushing for inclusion and we’ll keep making the case.

Image by Károly Váltó from Pixabay

 

Back to keyboard warrior mode

Tories do their best to jeopardise school/park consultation

Back from my holiday. I’ve tried to keep up with events whilst away. The Derwent Appeal against their application for judicial review has been rejected. As far as I’m aware, that is the end of the line in their attempts to prevent the approval of Tesco’s plans. The store is too big but we’re all agreed upon that, even the planning committee. And if it’s going to go-ahead, I’d rather it progressed quickly to allow the cricket club to get going. The worst case scenario has always been that the fiasco of the way the planning meeting was conducted was sufficient to fatally delay the implementation but not sufficient for the decision to be reversed. Nobody should feel happy with the way the Tories have conducted this. Their behaviour has ranged from being a soft touch to that of blinkered complacency.

Assuming, that this appeal is the end of the matter, the focus now turns to Stretford High School’s ambition to provide much needed improved sports facilities. Over the last few weeks the school has been working really hard to work with the community and park users to come up with a design that preserves the park area as a park but gives community access to excellent facilities; and protects the the community from being priced out of those facilities. The school has steadfastly refused to be drawn into the controversy over the Tesco and has maintained throughout that the school’s plans are completely separate. Whilst we on the Labour side always felt that there was potential to explore an enhanced Stretford Sports Centre or use of the land earmarked for the enlarged Tesco, the school to be fair, has always maintained its preference for the facilities to be in the park.

Again to be fair, the meetings with the community have been conducted positively and significant progress has been made. There’s still plenty of work to be done but it’s not out of the question that the school can reach an accommodation. I’m therefore shocked that the Tories have submitted a motion to this coming Council Meeting that seems designed to polarise the whole process. The consultation is not over, plans haven’t been submitted or even drawn up; and the school is doing its utmost to take the politics out the whole issue. Yet Trafford’s Tories are saying, firstly ‘Yes it is part of the Tesco scheme’, then they congratulate the school in the middle of a consultation. Personally, I think it’s very risky making a political football out of the school and I can’t help being reminded of the way Thatcher used to provoke disputes through inflammatory remarks when there was danger of agreement. Thatcher was deliberate, this is is just crass.

No doubt we’ll have a ritualised bun-fight at Council but it would have been better for the Tories to have kept their peace over this issue.

Sunday

Attended Lostock College car boot and fun day. Well attended and testament to the efforts to preserve this much loved school.

Monday

Attended Lostock Tenants and Residents meeting. Really pleased with the much reduced levels of anti social behaviour being experienced. Constructive proposal from Trafford Housing Trust to facilitate redesign of play area with planting and design delivered by the community young and old.

 

 

 

A Conundrum in the Park

We three Gorse Hill Councillors along with our Longford and Stretford colleagues descended upon Stretford High School on Monday night as a consultation on new sports facilities got underway. This was not an easy meeting.

The ongoing saga of the giant Tesco casts a mega-shadow over any proposal. As part of the Tesco scheme, the school surrendered a playing field to the council that will ultimately (if it comes to pass) be sold to Tesco to enable it to build the larger store when it’s added to the land they already own. The receipts from the land sale will be handed to Lancashire Cricket.

So under that shadow, we met to hear a proposal to improve the sports facilities available to the school. In normal circumstances this would be pushing at an open door. Labour, more than any other party puts school investment, particularly in schools serving deprived communities at the core of our ethos. It is why we are here.

The Proposal

The expansion of facilities includes putting a floodlit all weather pitch on Gorse Hill park which would be fenced off together with the existing park football pitch. Access would be controlled to prevent vandalism, dog fouling and over-use of the grass pitch. Additionally, the school will be building indoor sports facilities incorporating changing rooms on its own land in front of the school.

To be fair, the school is envisaging wide community access to the facilities when not being used by the pupils and control would contracted to a third party.

The problem is the park. We do not like to see parkland lost. Although there’ll be no buildings actually built on what is Gorse Hill park, there will be controlled/restricted access to some of it. One might argue that we already restrict access to bowling greens in some of our parks. Victoria Park Bowling Green in Stretford is a prime example of fencing off and securing part of a public park. So isn’t this same?

In principle it probably is the same as fencing off a bowling green. However, the two pitches on Gorse Hill park will be significantly bigger than bowling greens. So one issue is therefore, the scale. The second and major issue is that until the school surrendered its field which is now intended to enable the bigger Tesco, the school had an opportunity to develop facilities on that field. Whilst Victoria Park Bowlers will not have had an alternative location other than Victoria Park, Stretford High School did have an another option.

(leaving aside that I am still critical that such a prime position in Victoria Park is secured like a prison compound – the bowling green should have been moved to a less prominent position if it was going to have such an intimidating fence)

Strikingly, Stretford High School did not receive anything for the surrender of the Tesco field, so this is not a case of the school only being able to invest in facilities through the sale an asset. The school felt the field was not an appropriate facility for the school. The school told us about safeguarding issues, getting the pupils across a busy road and the time lost from the lesson in terms of getting over there. There were other issues in respect of Ofsted specifications and the cost of using Stretford Sports Centre rather than the indoor facilities to be built.

Our Criticism of the Process

Our position as local councillors was that too much of the negotiations had been done behind closed doors; that we’d not been consulted as to the surrender of the field to the council. We supported the school’s ambitions for better facilities, but we felt whilst we could understand the school’s preference for those facilities to be adjacent, rather than on the other side of the road and behind the sports centre, this was at the cost of enclosing a major portion of the park. The Tory Council’s desire to get the land into Tesco’s hands brought the council’s readiness to surrender the park into question. The appraisal of the suitability of the Tesco field for sports development and subsequent surrender of the land to Tesco would have benefited from greater scrutiny and transparency. It was now being presented as a fait accompli which quite frankly angered us. My colleague Dave Acton expressed this very well and powerfully.

Where do we go from here?

As I understand the field has not yet been sold to Tesco, or at least neither the council nor the Cricket Club have received the £21m, I believe any consultation should include the suitablity of the Tesco field as a location for some of the facilities. Of course this would in effect bring the £21m LCCC money and Tescos itself into the consultation, but that is what consultation are for, to present all the factors and interdependencies into the open and give people a say.

If the Council has entered into contractual obligations to Tesco and LCCC that prevent this, then we should be told, as we need to be assured that the council has not made itself liable if the whole thing goes kaput through the legal challenges against the planning permission; or indeed this consultation.

If the community feels that the facilities envisaged for the park are a welcome addition, we will want assurances as to access and pricing. We will also want the partitioning of the park to be no more than absolutely necessary.

Lastly

It is not unthinkable that there will be many who welcome the facilities. Certainly there’s much in the proposals that do have the community in mind. Amongst what’s envisaged is:

• an all weather pitch with flood-lights behind the present grass-pitch, allowing access to practice and participation of a variety of sports even on dark early evenings
• access to changing facilities for the footballers and other outside sport participants via the the new indoor facilities – these would be less likely to be feasible if all weather pitch was on the Tesco field and the indoor sports were on school grounds
• Access to other sports including netball and possibly tennis courts
• rooms available for community use from within the indoor sports
• a grass pitch protected from dog fouling
• encouragement for continued participation in sports for those leaving school and the possibilty of proactively working with the community
• a greater willingness to listen to the community on access to the park including getting a pelican crossing at the Talbot Road gates

Ultimately, perhaps the most valuable pledge may be that the school and council will only view the development a success if the community are using it and in their words the place is buzzing. How we entrench this into the project will be one of the biggest challenges if the community approves.

Really we need to know your views. At this stage we’re in the pre-consultation consultation and the school, together with the council are consulting with councillors, community groups, churches and the local sports groups. Once this preliminary stage is over there’ll be a presentation at Stretford Sports Centre and local homes will receive a leaflet.

I’ve already been to two of these preliminary meetings and intend to go to more. And we’ll be communicating with residents ourselves.

It’s vital we take everyone’s views into account.

Image: R Greenhalgh / Stretford High School

 

 

 

 

Planning – don’t you just despair? part two

Last week I was criticising the craven compliance towards officers and the politically blessed that meant our planning system in this country still owed more to medieval petitions from commoners to the Dukes and Duchesses than it did an objective place shaping mechanism. This week we were dealing with the consequences.

Lostock

American puritans might not be able to predict the end of the world but residents, local councillors and the police were unerringly accurate in their criticisms of aspects of the new development in Lostock when it went to planning. And of course they were ignored.

The police made representations that the proximity of the redeveloped play area to the new Over-55s flats with deck access was problematic. Neighbours complained that their lives would be impacted by the car parks at the rear and expressed little faith in the assurances of an electronically secure system.

Now with the barrier controls on the car park broken beyond repair (did they ever work?) the car parks have turned into an area not for parking cars but a hide-away for innocent pursuits or otherwise. The official play area is so designed that any activities in the evening are impacting on the homes around it. The police are being pulled into it and resources redirected due problems as much to do with design as criminality.

Things had reached such a pitch that Councillor Acton and myself arranged for senior officers from the different agencies to come and hear and respond to residents’ complaints. The good news was the support for police, pcsos and community safety officers.

There was near-universal support for ASBOs and the Conservatives are making a huge error in abolishing these ASBOs. The Conservatives are the party who are weak on law and order and are seen to be so. Ideally, we’d have liked Trafford Housing Trust to have provided someone at director level to the meeting and it does feel that staff are sometimes exposed to criticism that is not theirs to shoulder. Nevertheless, progress was made and I do feel some of the difficulties can be alleviated but we’re still left with a play area too near homes. We can design out football from the play area, we can seal the loose stones that get thrown at windows. But really these problems of proximity were identified at planning stage by everyone but planning officers and Conservative Councillors. The press releases of the time were the usual self-congratulatory pieces of tosh about a much needed development. Yes it was much needed but you still need to get the plans right and our planning authorities failed to in their primary duty.

Trafford’s Conservative Planners will always counter any criticism of themselves by pointing at the low level of successful appeals. Unfortunately you can only appeal against refusal to grant permission. Lostock residents can’t appeal against the flaws in the design that are blighting their lives and residents around the football stadium will not be able to appeal against the imposition of rock concerts when their kids are doing their exams. The lack of successful appeals is therefore a completely useless measure of the effective place shaping that should be happening since there is no appeal against a rubber stamp.

Monday

Labour Group AGM – I was confirmed in my position as shadow for Transformation and Resources and reappointed to Transport for Greater Manchester Committee. I will also serve on Accounts and Audit Committee and continue as Press Officer. Laurence is continuing as our planning spokesperson and Dave as leader. We are in excellent shape and if we can maintain the momentum of the last election there’s a batch of seats that would fall to us. That has to be the aim so it’s a year of serious politics.

Tuesday

Went to see City play Stoke. Having been unable to get a ticket for Wembley, I wasn’t going to miss the last match of the season. Campaigning for the local elections had meant I wasn’t able to queue when my loyalty points brought me into contention for a cup final ticket. Absolutely nothing to do with politics I know but these are good times for football in Manchester and I have also to congratulate United on the premiership title. I’m looking forward to the installation of Plaques to commemorate the lives of Duncan Edwards and Tommy Taylor; two of the famous Busby Babes who lived in this locality. The ceremonies are to take place on the 8th July details here. It will be a moving tribute to two of our greatest footballers.

Friday

School gates at Victoria Park. Parents are rightly worried about the effects of these horrendus cuts that targetting women and families in particular.

Monday

Lostock meeting discussed above.

Image by Károly Váltó from Pixabay

Local Issues predominate

Monday

The week started with attendance at Lostock Tenants and Residents Association. The state of roads predominated with Selby Road in particular drawing attention. The Humphrey Park station approach was also criticised as overgrown, unkempt with subway becoming increasingly smelly and forbidding. And dog poo is an increasing issue. We also discussed the deteriorating state of the shop forecourt at Lostock Parade.

There was some discussion as to the future for the tenants and residents association given the retirement of the chair. The residents were clear that it should continue; they valued its focus on the neighbourhood to the south of Barton Road and offered access to Trafford Housing Trust’s community panels. The alternative was to fall under the Lostock Partnership but it was felt that there was room for both associations. The challenge is to ensure we have officers in place to continue the good work.

In the evening it was Stretford’s Neighbourhood Forum, interestingly with less residents present than the morning’s Lostock meeting despite covering a much greater area. The two main agenda items were Trafford Link and Sustainable Living.

Trafford Link is the Local Involvement Network for Trafford – a dreadful name and one that belies a truly important statutory role. Thankfully the Government is changing their name to Healthwatch. Trafford Link is effectively the citizen’s voice on local health issues. With that ‘voice’ comes certain statutory rights to inspect providers whether it be hospitals or service providers and make a meaninful contribution to setting priorities. Ann Day, chair of Trafford Link (and coincidentally, acting chair of Lostock Residents – see above) gave an update on the changing shape of Trafford Healthcare Trust. The trust is looking to be taken over by a larger trust as it is not financially sustainable in its current form. The services currently provided at Trafford General will change – some services will inevitably be withdrawn but others could be added as the new trust develops the provision. The role of Link /Healthwatch will be crucial

The presentation raised interesting questions from residents and it’s clear that there’s a lack of awareness over the changes as many were learning about the scope for the first time.

Trafford’s sustainability officer then gave a talk on the borough’s approach to carbon reduction. The focus of points made by residents was on the lack of clarity over what plastics are recyclable. Plastic bottles are ok but what about those containing yoghurt drinks when yoghurt cartons themselves were not recylable? Residents are still confused and wanted guidance on the website.

Tuesday

Attended Lostock Youth club to hear (with officers) of the concerns of young people about changes to the accommodation to be allocated to them in Lostock College to replace their current delapidated premises. With the cuts agenda, I suppose we should be grateful that the provision is going to continue but you can’t help feeling that we really underprovide for our youth generally, but in Trafford particularly. The Lostock youth club is the only such council provided provision in the ward and many Trafford wards don’t have any youth clubs. At the same time we complain whenever youths gather round a bench or garden wall. It’s so frustrating that we put so much resources into countering anti-social behaviour and so little into providing diversionary activities. Still £120,000 being put into Lostock Youth Club is welcomed, even if I have reservations about locating it within the parameters of a secondary school. The lesson from Tuesday’s meeting was that the young people want to have ‘ownership’ of the plans, and a provision that matches their existing facilities.

Thursday

Day dominsated by the High Court ruling on Gorse Hill Tescos. Disappointing verdict; we all support a successful Cricket Club but the price of that success mustn’t fall upon residents either in cash terms or in the imposition of developments that wouldn’t otherwise be allowed. This proposal breaches both. It’s rich for Jim Cumbes to complain that his development has alreay passed enough hurdles and must be allowed to proceed when the Tesco on its own was rejected at just as many hurdles.

Friday

Attended GMITA Bus Network Committee as an observer. The main item on the agenda was the bus network changes. Predominately the changes were based in the Wigan area but the 290/291 service between Flixton, Trafford Centre, Trafford Park and Manchester is proposed to be foreshortened so that it will be Flixton to Trafford Park only. The changes to the 23/23A made temporarily last summmer whereby they alternate in the evening are to be made permanent.

Saturday

Attended the Trafford Local Elections Campaign Launch with Andy Burnham as special guest. This was a really positive event. Labour is turning up the heat on this discredited Government. The Government have set on a course so damaging to the economy and our services. Andy told us about how the Tories were undermining the principles of the NHS:

• They were removing the cap on private practice so hospitals could deliver as much private care as they wanted.
• They were insisting that all Trusts remained within budget, rather than allow the surplus of one trust balance the deficit of another
• They had removed the 18 week time-limit on seeing a consultant

Essentially they were encouraging trusts to deliver more and more services privately to balance the budget and it didn’t matter how long those who couldn’t afford to pay had to wait. I cannot understand Lib Dems such as Chris Huhne saying that the reforms adhere to Lib Dem principles. I haven’t forgotten marching with Lib Dems against the Iraq war, I even supported Vince Cable’s mansion tax, but what they’re doing now is beyond the pale. Beveridge was a Liberal; he wouldn’t be now! They seem to have sold their souls. It’s just incredible.

Dave Acton gave a tremendous speech at the meeting, the best I’ve heard him give. He denounced the pretence of Tory Trafford for portraying the local cuts as almost painless when in fact they were hitting the most vulnerable.

Sunday

Really good doorstep conversations in Altrincham. Quite a few former Tory voters are switching to Labour arguing the Conservatives are just going too deep too fast. Former Lib Dem voters are deserting them en masse. So it’s going to interesting in the local elections

Image by Károly Váltó from Pixabay