Forum Topics

Angry

Damn I’m so angry.Just had the Northfields Ward ‘Vote Labour’ leaflet through my letterbox.The claims of their ‘successes’ are scandalous!“Labour kept Northfield Library open and provided better facilities”.Only after a concerted campaign by, inter alia, Eric Leach and West Ealing Neighbours who fought this same Labour council’s plans to close it or, at best, man it with ‘volunteers’. This ‘battle’ was won despite the loaded ‘consultation’ exercise from this Labour council.“Labour built the Log Cabin Children’s Centre.”What a dreadful sleight on the tireless work for over 30 years by the dedicated leaders and volunteers along with the countless number who raised, and continue to raise funds to support this vital service. The council provided funds to restore a neglected resources which provides, through a charity, a vital service at far lower cost than the council could.“Labour increased primary school places and plans more at Elthorne Park High School”Is meeting a statutory obligation to provide primary school places an achievement? Any council would have to do the same. This is the same ‘colour’ of council that shamelessly embarked on school rebuilding programmes via PFI which will see us all paying for the new buildings long after they have reached the end of their viable life.Then, to add insult to injury, I notice that one of the  Labour candidates is Cllr. Varma. Is this the same Cllr. Varma who was  deselected by his own ward party? . If so, if he was not good enough for Southall Broadway what Damascene conversion now makes him good enough for Northfields?Anyone who values this borough should cast their vote for any party other than labour.

Nigel Brooks ● 4512d2 Comments ● 4512d

Labour skimps on Central Ealing's roads

In the last two years the Labour council has allocated £6.5 million (in total for the two years together) of capital spending to resurfacing the Borough’s roads and pavements.  This sounds like a lot of money but it is half of what the previous administration spent on the roads.  You might think that on average this money would be fairly evenly spent across the Borough.  It isn’t.  Although the council claims to use objective assessments of roads and pavements the actual spending patterns do make you wonder.  In the one year 2011/12 50% of expenditure went to the 5 wards of Southall (they might expect to get 22% on average). In the one year 2012/13 49% of expenditure went to the 2 wards of Northolt (they might expect to get 9% on average).How much has gone to Central Ealing?  Over two years and six wards the council has spent £549K resurfacing ten roads or pavements in all of Central Ealing:Hollingbourne Gardens (road), ClevelandSutherland Road (right pavement), ClevelandHaven Green (road), Ealing BroadwayRavensbourne Gardens (road), Ealing BroadwayThe Knoll (both pavements), Ealing BroadwayGreystoke Gardens (road), Hanger HillChilton Road (both pavements), NorthfieldsRegina Road (road), WalpoleChapel Road (road), WalpoleClovelly Road (road), WalpoleEaling Common had nothing at all.  This represents 8.4% of the Borough’s total spend.  If the six wards had received an equal share they might have expected to get 26% of the total, some 17.6% or £1.144K more.  You can work out for yourself if you think that Central Ealing is getting a good deal.  More details here:http://philtaylor.org.uk/2012/11/labours-road-spending-games/

Phil Taylor ● 5065d19 Comments ● 4516d

What DO our elected Councillors and Council Officers REALLY DO?

Gerry (Mr Tan)! Based on your recent comments on this Forum about the quality of Bond Street I purposefully went off and looked at Bond Street again. Perhaps I was being too unkind? The build quality of the pavement is really good. The natural stone flags have stood the test of footfall and weather well. However, it is the build quality of the work that was done five years that has allowed the street to remain straight and level. Around this, however, there is an air of creeping neglect that suggests that Ealing Council does not really care what is happening hear, or cannot maintain the road. Whether this is financial, political, or due to the main Contractors (Enterprise!) I do not know, however my investigation is intriguing.Starting at the North-East top corner of Bond Street there is a (once-) white painted grill that opens onto the street:It is ajar and reveals what looks like several years of accrued rubbish.As you go down the street you notice the way in which the local businesses are narrowing the busy pavement with their planters and “window boxes” making it difficult to go along the pavement more than one abreast in certain places.The impressive and robust planters have withstood a few years of hard use, however, are clearly not being looked after. On closer inspection this planter has an extensive collection of cigarette ends, rubbish and weeds inside it.Further down the street the topiarised Buxus hedge balls have been allowed to die completely and not replaced. Some sensible individual thought to put some annual bedding in here as a temporary stop gap, though on closer inspection there is nice selection of rubbish and cigarette ends in there; a length of rusty braided wire rope loops up from the soil (originally used as to anchor the roots of the Buxus to stop it being pulled up by thieves and vandals it remains) to trap the unwary child's fingers...Further down the street there are more dying bushes and a staved-in container (this plant is in need of urgent help), and yet more rubbish.Across the road there is a damaged parking meter with yellow and black tape on it leaning at a strange angle awaiting repair.Overshadowing it all across a quarter of the West side of Bond Street are the closed and boarded front of the old YMCA and the associated charity shops; bought by the Council for use as part of the projected film quarter development. Boarded and empty they represent an important asset that the community could use.Bond Street in Ealing, being at the very centre of wealth and business in Ealing, you think would attract greater scrutiny than it does from the main political parties: situated in a Conservative ward in a Borough run by a Labour Council you would think both Conservatives and Labour would be micro-managing this prime site? However, it seems to be suffering the same level of indifference from both parties except, of course, Southall. You would think that all parties would be jumping up and down on the Council Officers and the contractors to ensure Bond Street was A1plusplus AND CLAIMING THIS FOR THEMSELVES. Especially as there is a local election in May!As a final thought, the quality of the real stone pavement seems to have given it a longer life than a cheaper alternative, however, I think that we must bear in mind that this project was conceived and enacted in wealthier times, i.e. before the “credit crunch” and what was acceptable and indeed lauded is not now. The pavement in front of Ealing Town Hall is over-ostentatious, and the immensely expensive cut granite paving stones being used in Southall have a positively “Marie Antoniette – Let them eat Cake” factor about them in  the light of emerging food banks. Based on a stroll through the quality retail street of Central Ealing, I am lead to wonder yet again what the politicians who say they are represent us are actually do?

Peter Mcleod ● 4544d13 Comments ● 4517d

Why isn't planning an election issue?

I had hoped that the borough's under resourced planning department would become an election issue but it would appear that all parties are studiously avoiding it. Perhaps there's just too much potential for embarrassment where certain local politicians are concerned for it to be a comfortable subject for discussion. Over the last two years I have had more contact with the department than I ever wanted (1. a surprise demolition plus the absurd planning applications that followed it, 2. the outhouse complete with shower and toilet that has been built two metres from our kitchen window, 3. an attempt to discover the planning history relating to the Starlite Ballroom) and I am appalled at its inability to cope with its caseload. I am very concerned about the increase in run off caused by the loss of front (and in some cases back) gardens but no one seems willing to address the issue. Telling homeowners that they shouldn't buy a house with a garden if they don't want one isn't a vote winner but I have wondered how much it is costing everyone to deal with extra surface water, something that could be reduced if the rules were enforced. The green waste charge isn't enough of an excuse. It would be interesting to know how many councillors and prospective councillors have exceeded the permitted five square metres of paving outside their properties. I would welcome some support and advice on the council website about how to reinstate a front garden (we are trying to break up a patch of tarmac by letting things grow through it). A grant or reduced council tax for those who do so is probably too much to ask for.

Albertina McNeill ● 4525d11 Comments ● 4517d