Forum Topic

Submissions to Scrutiny Committee disallowed

On Monday night, there are two call ins being debated regarding the Streetspace/LTN scheme and the Hounslow Cabinet‘Plan to extend them dramatically not just in Chiswick but across the Borough. Cllr Todd is leading for the Conservatives Call in, and Cllr Richard Eason for Labour.  The support for the call ins have been growing cross party. On Wednesday morning, in time for the 5pm deadline, I wrote my comments citing local impacts and the fact that overwhelmingly those consulted did not support the changes. On Friday evening at about 4.30pm, I received an email from “Theresa” from the scrutiny Committee email saying my comments could not be included in the Committee bundle because they referred to the C9 Cycleway which was now subject to Judicial Review. I made not one mention of C9 nor even Chiswick High Road. It seems that several other submissions have also been rejected on the same grounds. Needless to say the submissions to the Committee now show a nice balance for the Cycling Fraternity and omit the more detailed substantive submissions against the Streetspace/LTN schemes.  That will help the Cabinet defend its conduct. Should we be surprised?  And what to do. Another issue for Scrutiny?

Jackie Elton ● 2161d31 Comments

They’ve all been dunned. Best to resubmit them to Cllr Todd and Eason and cc scrutiny saying that you do not accept this.

Russell Pearson ● 2161d

Ditto. My reply came from Mikhael of the scrutiny team."Your email is out of the scope of the call-in which deals with interim/ final reports and in principle phase 3 approval and as such will not be published as supporting material for Members."They're marking their own homework again. Thank goodness for the independent judgement of Steer......

Bruce Hammal ● 2161d

Ditto again, something smells rotten about this ! Wonder how many others have had same response ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 2161d

From I have seen of the allowed submissions, only the rather subjective ones. None of the substantive ones dismantling the Commonplace Survey or with detailed points got through, unless of course submitted by those in favour, mostly cyclists. Extraordinary.

Jackie Elton ● 2161d

I will put forward the suggestion  that the people whose responses were not accepted did not actually read the terms of the committee and the decisions being reviewed.

Michael Robinson ● 2161d

I certainly read the instructions and adhered to them ! Why do you always have to patronise and insult those with differing views to your own, and this is something that's been said to you on countless occasions  !

Loraine Pemberton ● 2161d

So Loraine, can you tell us your comments on the process described in section 3.4 of the cabinet report?  Can you list the national, London or borough policies that you do not think should be applied or should be applied? Do you have any comments on the types of data listed or any of the other items mentioned as part of the process?Regarding the proposed 'phase 3', can you give your comments on the suggested list of cycle routes, school streets and additional Low Traffic Neighbourhoods?If your response didn't address these types of points then it won't have been accepted. However you said you read all the documentation so you know all this already,

Michael Robinson ● 2161d

Micheal I though you weren’t allowed to mention cycle routes as it isn’t about them.Plus if the average resident included all your points, they probably think you wrote it form them.On that Q & A online forum my question was blocked by the moderated, then the moderator emailed me to , sarcastically to give a reason why it was blocked. The real reason was the moderator may have been told to block any questions about a certain subject.  The another weird thing that happened, about three times Cllr Curran was shown on screen talking to some we couldn’t hear. But was saying that Micheal wanted to talk to him after the meeting.Now why would someone be allowed to speak to Cllr Curran after the online Q & A had finished, very strange behaviour.

Bernard Allen ● 2160d

Bernard,The Overview committee terms stated they would not accept responses  on Cycleway 9.The terms said they would only accept responses on two points:- the evaluation process for existing schemes as described in the cabinet papers - the proposed 'Phase 3' schemes as described in the cabinet papers.The 'Phase 3' schemes contained a list of possible low traffic neighbourhoods, school streets and other cycleways in additional to cycleway 9.  The cycleways listed were a copy and paste from the borough transport strategy that dates from 2019 so were nothing new.

Michael Robinson ● 2160d

But I said Micheal I though you weren’t allowed to mention cycle routes as it isn’t about them.So if you haven’t mentioned any cycle lane and you submission gets rejected  because Hounslow says you have surely there isn’t something  quiet right, with the process, Or is Hounslow having a Trump moment

Bernard Allen ● 2160d

I note, with interest, that a certain Councillor Joanna Biddolph is a member of the Scrutiny Committee. Is this not a 'conflict of interest'? ;-)

Ken Munn ● 2160d

Part of Chris Soze forum postYou can do this too at:https://democraticservices.hounslow.gov.uk/documents/g12025/Public reports pack Monday 30-Nov-2020 18.00 Overview and Scrutiny Committee.pdf?T=10If you get to page 65 onwards to page 81 you can see submissions from external parties.  From what is being said on social media 16 pages simply does not represent the number of submissions that sought to provide evidence on the 5 key points for or against the reason for the 2 call ins:Inadequate consultation with stakeholders prior to the decision;Inadequate evidence on which to base a decision;The action is not proportionate to the desired outcome;A potential human rights or equalities challenge;Insufficient consideration of legal and financial advice.Appears that those saying there is clear evidence to back the call ins are most disgruntled. It is also interesting to observe that 2 identical submissions from Hounslow Cycling are simply partially copied. Was that a form letter sent in or a copying error made by the officers.  One of those says "Hounslow Cycling is the borough group of London Cycling Campaign, a membership charity with 10,000 members".So the question is as a member of the Scrutiny Committee do I read that as it is Hounslow Cycling that has 10,000 members or do I know that it the total membership of London Cycling Campaign, across 33 boroughs and 9m people?  About 0.11% of the population.  So what is the answer? 

Bernard Allen ● 2160d

Bernard,The terms say they won't accept responses regarding cycleway 9.However, other cycleways are referenced in the 'phase 3' document, along with other measures (School streets, low traffic neighbourhoods).The terms say they will only accept responses regarding the process used to evaluate existing measures, and phase 3.Therefore if someone did make a response referring to a cycleway, or other measure, listed in the 'phase 3' document, I assume this would have been accepted.If you look at the accepted responses, there are some that refer to measures listed in the 'phase 3' document.

Michael Robinson ● 2160d

According to the LCC website they are a 11,500 member charity. Thus the whole of London is the answer.Whilst walking along Chiswick High Road at 11.00am yesterday cars had to mount the pavement to let two blue-light ambulances through. What madness now requires pavement space (walking) to be used for emergency vehicles to pass.Oh wait a moment - LCC says this is for the greater good.

David Millar ● 2160d

Well at least Hounslow Cycling know how to pull the right strings “ Hounslow Council Overview and Monitoring committee will be reviewing the process for Streetspace projects.  Please contact the chair of the committee at scrutiny@hounslow.gov.uk and say why you support these projects. You should make this as personal as possible, and consider the following points:The committee is not considering cycleway 9, so don't mention this but you can can refer to any other Streetspace schemesMention the impact traffic has on your local area and what it means for you and your family to have a better environment for walking and cycling.Mention specific improvements you have seen, support for the council’s approach to evaluate these schemes and what measures you would like the council to consider in later projects.” signed “Michael”, Hounslow Cycling

Russell Pearson ● 2160d

It looks like the Chiswick cllrs are being dozy again...Firstly it looks like they forgot that they could 'call in' the original decisions to implement the 'phase 1 and 2' measures but that is too late now.  The decisions being called in now are just grandstanding and won't change anything significant.Secondly, in their call-in submission they refer to the traffic measures on Stile Hall Gardena snd Wellesley Rd.  These have already gone through 3 consultations with statutory consultation for traffic orders made in September 2019 so won't be subject to the process they are complaining about anyway...

Michael Robinson ● 2160d

It was “Michael’s” advice that I  used to compose my own response though I added the rider that while I was a cyclist I did not support the aims of London Cycling and their organised attempt to influence the scrutiny committee.No doubt that’s what got me rejected.

Bruce Hammal ● 2160d

But what about the 8 Labour Councillors that have also called it in.Are they dozy to? I Bet the three musketeers didn’t expect that one.

Bernard Allen ● 2160d

On the process to evaluate existing schemes, yes,  I can't see how they can change this.On the process for 'phase 3' schemes, changes to this don't really matter as there isn't any money for them anyway.They weren't dozy enough to use an example that had already gone through 3 consultations and with a traffic order issued over a year ago.

Michael Robinson ● 2160d

Ahhh, so is that the answer it is 11,500 for the whole of London, the 33 boroughs and 9 million Londoners?So how many members are there in Hounslow Cycling locally?

Chris Soze ● 2160d

Michael Robinson:"It looks like the Chiswick cllrs are being dozy again..."That comment says so much about you rather than your insult to hard working Councillors !Years ago a very wise person told me always be polite to your opponents because you never know when the balance of power will change...Your arrogance will surely be your undoing.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2160d

Loraine - did you have any comments about the points I raised? Specifically, the Chiswick cllrs appeared to have missed the boat calling in the implementation of the measures they are complaining about.  And they are complaining about measures that went through a consultation process over a year ago, is the process they say they want to follow anyway and not related to the decision they are complaining about.By 'balance of power' do you mean if Labour councillors are elected in Chiswick? It looks like there will be a change of boundaries for the next council elections.Or a Conservative administration in Hounslow?  The Cycleway 9 plans were launched under Conservative/Independent control of Hounslow so that was fine with me.

Michael Robinson ● 2160d

KenI also note with interest that it's strange that you only picked Cllr Joanna Biddolph  as your 'conflict of interest' target, or have you conveniently  forgotten that Conservative Cllr Ron Mushiso, an avid cyclist, is also on the Scrutiny Committee ?Tut tut Ken, you slipped up there with your obsession about Cllr Biddolph 🤣

Loraine Pemberton ● 2160d

No, it's  pointless engaging with you.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2160d

LorraineI posted earlier a reply in response to something from David Millar above. He stated:"According to the LCC website they are a 11,500 member charity. Thus the whole of London is the answer…..."My reply:Ahhh, so is that the answer it is 11,500 for the whole of London, the 33 boroughs and 9 million Londoners?  So how many members are there in Hounslow Cycling locally?So my further question is what is the total membership of Hounslow Cycling?  Is it you who can help with that or would that be someone else?No one seems to have picked it up I guess because I put the question back into the the thread.  Thanking you in advance for assistance.

Chris Soze ● 2160d

LorraineI have recent because it was wrong of me to continue with the title that had been attached, so forgive me.  Now changed to a simple title and simple question.I posted earlier a reply in response to something from David Millar above"According to the LCC website they are a 11,500 member charity. Thus the whole of London is the answer…..."My reply:Ahhh, so is that the answer it is 11,500 for the whole of London, the 33 boroughs and 9 million Londoners?So how many members are there in Hounslow Cycling locally?So my further question is what is the total membership of Hounslow Cycling?  Is it you who can help with that or would that be someone else? 

Chris Soze ● 2160d

ChrisWay back to when these discussions first started, I believe  that Michael Robinson,replied back to me there was between 300 and 400 members in Hounslow Cycling.https://hounslowcycling.org/ But don't rely on that as a fact, but the post is to far back to check the wording.

Bernard Allen ● 2160d

I submitted two items and both were rejected - one by Nicola (no surname) and one by Mikhael (no surname) and both items specifically addressed various grounds for the Call-In requests.Is there no end to the shameful behaviour of this Council and their attitude to the residents of Chiswick?

Mandy Waters ● 2160d

I took Russell's advice and sent copies of my submissions to Cllrs Todd and Eason. john.todd@hounslow.gov.uk richard.eason@hounslow.gov.uk

Bruce Hammal ● 2160d

"both items specifically addressed various grounds for the Call-In requests."The documentation on the Hounslow website clearly stated that responses would only be accepted on the following points:"Approve the process for undertaking interim and final reviews on Streetspace schemes set out in section 3.4 of the cabinet report."and"Consider and approve, in principle, the proposed phase 3 Streetspace schemes, developed following further detailed analysis of the network, including as set out in section 3.5 and Appendix 3 of the cabinet report."There is nothing about accepting responses on the grounds for the call-in requests.Some of the grounds for the call-in requests are irrelevant anyway given they cover cycleway 9 and schemes that were decided over a year ago.

Michael Robinson ● 2160d

This was an interesting submission from the public in the pack for the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.  Has some very valid subjects for responses.  Interesting to know if there were many more like this with similar themes that got rejected."On the 30th November there will be an Overview and Scrutiny Committee that will "Call - in" Cabinet Officers decisions to progress further stages of the programme. This is timely and it is right that both a Labour Councillor and Conservative Councillor have reached the same decision given that:1. The Council is disregarding it’s Duty of Care2. Is disregarding it’s obligations under the Equality Act 20103. Is disregarding the Human Rights Act 19984. Is disregarding the Guidance provided by The Department fro Transport 5. Is not listening to residentsThe London Borough of Hounslow has abandoned democracy."

Chris Soze ● 2159d