Stanley Park - Not welcome here?

Press coverage seems to indicate, that people in new houses on the old Queen Mary's are opposed to Stanley Park being sited there. No doubt they are not aware that a lot of people opposed their houses being built!

As always this illustrates that on any large sites with phased development, that there should be clear planning polcies making clear what will happen in the other phases. Then people will be less likely to object. This site has had options for housing care homes and a school. There need to be more clarity on these sort of longer-term planning decisions.

Health Joint Scrutiny - 1 February

This is being held as a joint forum on the BHCH proposals.

On acute, there may not being much too report until the London Review is announced.

As for Local Care Hospitals, whatever the masterplan says these are all developing separately in different areas. This is much more sensible than the previous top-down proposals.

Council Meeting - 22 January

I was unable to attend this because I was away. However Paul Scully motion seemed to have many postive points about it.

His reference to Grammar school playing a pivotal role is of course absolutely right. In many households in Purley and Epsom the effort to get in a local Grammar school that may just happen to reside in Sutton is really important.

Of course for 85% of Sutton children go to a local comprehensive, which is 10% up since the 1970's and I welcome the fact the Tory motion welcomes the importance of education for all!

Sutton - Getting a Bad Deal??

As usual at this time of year we see the regular letter from Sean Brennan to the Minister for Local Government saying that Sutton is getting a "bad deal" from the local government settlement.

So a borough like Sutton where people are broadly affluent with an average house value of over 300,000 is getting a bad deal. Perhaps people should think about this a bit.

Perhaps Lib Dem controlled Liverpool City Council, with all its social problems should get a bit less and affluent Lib Dem Sutton should get a bit more. Do people think that is a good idea? If you live in Liverpool you will on average live over 5 years less than a Sutton resident. If you had a choice where would you choose to live?

Instead of saying Sutton is getting a bad deal, perhaps Sean Brennan should use his strong social conscience to look beyond Sutton's borders and perhaps ponder that living in Sutton is a privilege that people in many other parts of the country would love to enjoy if they could afford to!!

Living Longer - a cost to the Council Tax Payer?

The Commission for Social Care Report on elderly care report will tell us what we all know:

1. That people are living longer

2. That this is an increasing cost pressure to Council's, who are in response rationing care more through tighter eligibilty criteria.

For all the press coverage, I suspect this issue will go away over the next 20 years, as the current concern will be expressed by the very responsible war-time generation.

As we move down the generations, increasingly hedonistic baby boomers will sensibly blow the capitial they have before they get too infirm thus transferring the presure back to the state. That will be the new challenge, which will inevitably require the taxes of newer migrant comunities to pay for it.

Even further on, by the time people of my age get to that stage, we won't recognise the issue as many of us will be living much of our dotage as 20 to 30 somethings in synthetic worlds like Second Life, which in 30 to 40 years will be much more realistic than they currently are. I joined last month and I certainly think it will be an expanding part of the consciousness of people younger than me as it becomes more mainstream. In years to come people with disabilities and the elderly will probably use the world to live lives where they are perceived in completely different ways to their first life. Generational differences will evolve as you will become less clear of the age of the people you are communicating with.

A sensible Council will be thinking ahead to new challenges that an Over 80, technology literate generation will throw of up in 30 to 40 years. Even more interesting in that timeframe there will be the expanding minority of over 80 "early adopters" whose mindset will not be hostile to the latest fad of gadget, or the reality TV show equivalent. They will be the ones who see early adoption as key to a supple mind in later life.

So instead of the usual debate on the isue of the future of the elderly, I think a bit of forward thinking is required.

Development Control - 17 January

Unfortunately I was unable to read all this meeting document due to something wrong witthe Council's pdf.

I was able to read the paper on the planning application for the hotel on top of the UCI cinema car park in St Nicholas Way.

This makes sense as it we don't allow development in places like this, we just end up putting pressure on other areas.

Strategy Committee - 16 January

A few points:

Item 6 - Social Services Performance
I welcome the improvement in what has been the boroughs worst service. Over the last 4 years we have seen a significant improvement.

Item 8 - Belsize Gardens
This is a confidential item. It will be interesting to see that the management arrangements are and whether the coventant issues have been sorted out.

Item 9 - Equality and Diverstiy Forum
In view of the national changes a local change to a single forum was inevitable.

Item 10 - Rent Reveiw
This is likely to be straightforward with national rent capping. Of more interest will be what commitments the Coucil will set for the ALMO this year.

Item 11 - Roundshaw Stoack Transfer
In view of the ballot result, this item should be a formality.

Item 14 - Wallington County Grammar School
This item may be agreed, but do the school have planning permission for what may be a development in the Green Belt?

Item 17 - Kimpton Site sales
I hoep the Council gets a good deal, despite past difficulties. However it is also vital to complete the redvelopment of the site so as to improve the local public realm and keep Mr Hilldrup happy.

Decent Homes Money Announced

Today Tony Blair and Labour's Communities Secretary Ruth Kelly announced an additional 485 million for the modernisation of around 55,000 homes during the next year. The funding - which brings the total amount allocated to councils with ALMOs for improving council homes since 2002 to 3.7bn - will enable 17 local authorities (19 ALMOs) across the country to continue their work in ensuring their properties meet the Decent Homes Standard.

I have yet to hear whether Sutton qualified for this money, but we are on the waiting list so to speak.

Since 1997, the number of non-decent social homes have been reduced by more than a million and 500,000 new kitchens, 350,000 new bathrooms and 630,000 new boilers have been installed in council homes.

ASBO Powers for Council Estates.

The Prime Minister and Ruth Kelly today announced that resident groups on council estates in England are to be given new powers to tackle anti-social behaviour and take day-to-day control of council services.

New regulations laid before Parliament today will for the first time give Tenant Management Organisations (TMOs) powers to apply for Anti-Social Behaviour Orders. Powers of this kind are at the heart of the Governments Respect programme.

There will be clear safeguards to ensure the new powers are used responsibly, but, where a TMO has been assessed as competent, the Government sees no reason why it should not be delegated ASBO functions.

At present Sutton only has Resident Democracies, but this new power, made lead to a debate locally as to what sort of powers are devolved to local estates.

London Mayoral Powers

I do wonder why Lib Dem MP's are wasting precious debating time in Parliament on attempting to pass amendments trying to scrutinise London Mayoral appointments. Having moved a pointless amendment in Parliament, no doubt Tom Brake MP will be soon writing to Sutton Council to demand:

1. Council scrutiny of the Libe Dem and Tory Groups appointment of political assistants.

2. Council scrutiny of the Strategy Committee appointment of senior Council officers as they are in effect appointments made by politicians.

Let's get real. The Mayoral power to appoint would apply whoever was Mayor and I would not criticise who a Lib Dem or Tory Mayor has appointed, just as I have not queried who the local party groups have appointed as political assistants in Sutton. It would be so nice to have a little political consistancy from others.

The Tory amendment to call on the Mayor to consult boroughs was more sensible, but still a little pointless. The Mayor has to consult already on all his strategies and both myself and the Council itself have commented on almost all of them over the last 6 years.

Schools Update

Two things to mention:

1. Alan Johnson today published updated guideleines on selection. Whilst for some they don't go far enough, they nevertheless tighten existing rules and will generally benefit the 70% of Sutton children who don't go to Grammar or church schools by creating a more level playing field, with bans on first preference only, similar institution only, interviews of pupils and financial contributions. However I suspect the recommendation for Fair Banding will not be taken up in Sutton as Overton Grange parents are likely to protest about it as they did last time, costing John Dodwell his Strategy Committee membership at the time.

2. The anouncement of local aurthorities in Birmingham and ">Manchester sponsoring Academies, will make this policy more acceptable than it was in the past. In Sutton whilst Stanley Park is opposed and I assume Carrshalton Sports College won't want to go down that direction either, I wonder whether in order to achieve the 400 target, whether a school like Glenthorne will eventually seek to work with the local authority on a project like this.

LGA talk about Rubbish!

Today's proposal from the local Government for extra charges for residents who generate more waste and Council Tax reductions for those who don't generate as much, has a number fo flaws:

1. It is hard to enforce. More people will not take rubbish home and leave it on buses in shopping areas, parks etc. We will see an increase in flytipping.

2. It will be an addtional cause of neighbour disputes as residents claim their neighbours are putting rubbish in their bins. Council's will have to install locks on bins.

3. How will it work in faltted areas with communcal bin systems?

4. It will not onely be seen as a stealth tax, but will actually transfer wealth from poorer low recycling areas to wealthier high recycling areas. Look at the stats in Sutton if you want evidence.

Incentives would be a good alternative but are likely to be too small to be effective. A much simpler alternative is as follows:

1. Council's use their existing powers to target those who do not adhere to existing waste management. This will cost money, but only aftet this has been done can anything else be done.

2. Targetted recycling campaigning by Council's in poorer areas. Interestingly I am currently doing some work in this field and will report on later on how this works. Agian this will cost money, but will prove more publicly acceptable.

3. Work with schools to promote recycling by parents. This is another area I am currently working on. If you look at the stats, low recycling correlates to areas with high numbers of children, but children are the most committed to recycling. Surely we can use to schools to tackle this issue. Again it require extra effort.

None of the alternative I set out requires legislation. However it does require political will. So far Sutton has not gone down the LGA road and had focussed on the volutary approach. I hope it stays that way.

Phillippa Stroud selected to fight Sutton and Cheam for the Tories

I happened to meet the new Tory candidate for Sutton and Cheam tonight. Her name is Phillippa Stroud. She seemed very friendly to me. I believe she fought Birmingham Lady wood at the last General Election.

She has already stimulated debate amongst local and national Tories with Iain Dale's Diary receiving a lot of comments about her views on social issues.

Previous Tory candidate Richard Willis has stood down. I thought he was a dynamic candidate and results in May seemed to point to him unseating Paul Burstow in 2008/9. I hope he decides to have another go for Parliament in due course.

Tories get a raw deal

Was at the Civic tonight at the meeting and saw Paul Scully who shoed me the new Tory Group room.

What a state, compared to the Lib Dem rooms. I assume something is going to be done to improve things in the coming months.

If the Tories are going to give up some of the allowances the Lib Dems are likely to offer them ( a bit silly really), they should at least get their room properly sorted.

London Council's Grants Committee - What are the Lib Dems up to?

I hope Councillor Ruth Dombey is giving regular report backs to the Sutton Lib Dem Group on her role on the London Council's Grants Committee?

As some of you will be aware, this Committee, with no overall majority, but chaired by the Tories, is seeking to substantially reduce its budget spending on London-wide voluntary groups, basically because the outer London boroughs claim they don't get value for money from it.

A few points to consider:

1. The level of grants in real terms is much lower than it ever was under the GLC.

2. 40% of current London borough of Sutton residents spend up to 40% of their lives travelling into central London and using services there. Up to a third of London Borough residents in the next 10 years will be people who have moved out from inner London.

3. Most of the voluntary groups affected are London-wide bodies concerned with tackling less well off sectors of society. Sutton should be proud that it is contributing a tiny investment in organisations that bring such a wide benefit to London as a whole, rather than see all problems stopping at the borough boundary.

I really think that Lib Dem representatives on the Grants Committee should reconsider their support for this sort of short-termist approach and recognise the value of London-wide voluntary organisations, supported by the joint endeavours of London Councils.

The alternative apporach is for the Mayor of London to take over this London-wide activity and leave certain boroughs to look inwards! I am sure Ken would be very happy to oblige!

Big Changes in Community Health Services

For all the debate about acute services, we should not forget big changes are happening in community health services. Next week at Health Scrutiny there will be debates on the following:

1. The probable closure of one Mental Health Resource Centre - probably Walligton, as a result of budget reductions and a move of services out into the community.

2. A reconfiguration of the Community Mental Health Teams with a probable reduction in number of teams.

3. The closure of Sutton Day Hospital for the elderly on the Sutton General site (as well as the equivalent at the Neslson Hospital in Merton). Before anyone thinks this is something new, people should remember that if the Critical Care Hospital (CCH) had been built on the site, this service would have closed by 2008/9 as the current site became a building site. The service has been declining for a while, so its future has not been clear for a number of years. Once it has gone, and the Malvern Ward has gone for elderly mental health site, you might start picking up, that services on the Sutton General site are being cleared. Is this for a proposal of a potential sell-off of part of the site for the last ditch proposal of a small CCH for the February London Hospital Review,(conducted as we all know by a Royal Marsden Doctor), or is the site being cleared so it can be offered for sale to the Royal Marsden for an expaned specialism. From a Sutton borough perspective, the Royal Marsden option seems much better as the capital receipt for the Sutton site, also with a likely capital receipt from part of the the Epsom site could be used to pay for a full and comprehensive refurbishment of St Helier Hospital. I wonder if this osrt of disagreement contributed to Lorraine Clifton leaving the Epsom and St Helier Trust.

Reconfiguring Scrutiny - A Step in The Right Direction

A paper is coming to Community Leadership Working Party next week that reviews the Scrutiny function. This has been on the cards for a while, but gained more importance after the recent debates on the GLL contract. Many of the issues covered are ones I have raised in this Blog:

My comments on it are:

1. The separation of audit is long overdue. Councillor Zaidi will be kept busy!

2. The new scrutiny committees make a lot of sense with external scrutiny developing further with Policing likely to come under Sustainable Communities. In view of the need to be fair, I will be suggesting at the Police Consultative Committee that they apply for its Chair to be made a "special advisor" to the new Committee to build better Police Community engagement links. I suspect this suggestion will be accepted.

3. I am a little concerned over the proposal for SCAGs. I aggree they should be reviewed to see if their work can be covered by the new Committees, however I am concerned if any are downgraded to informal working parties as this takes us back to the unclear lines of accountability that led to the wheelie bin debacle. I recommend Councillors reread the excellent 150 or so page report on this subject writtne, by previous Chief Executive, Joanna Simons, her most important contribution to this Council. Hopefully following further discussion, this point could be looked at again?

Green Council's - Sutton gets an honourable mention, but is not listed in Top 10

Today's national Guardian has conducted a survey on the top 10 Green Councils:

Sutton gets an honourable mention but does not get in the top 10.

Here is a big opportunity for a Cameroonian "green-friendly" Tory Group to take the lead.

The generally risk-adverse Lib Dems will be wary of taking on any big new ideas unless they have political consensus. They are still somewhat cautious after the wheelie-bin scandal of 98-02.

Therefore the Tory Group should start pushing for any green projects they like as the Lib Dems are likely to accept them and the Tories canthen claim a positive result achieved.

That is an effective opposition role the Tories could seize on over the next few years as well as some of the more predictable activities they carry out.

Will they be up for it?

Councillor Emails and Surgeries

Just to report my regular monthly check on Councillor Access, now we are 8 months after the local elections:

1. Wrythe Ward Councillors still don't have a public email address.

2. Wandle Valley Ward Councillors still don't hold surgeries.

Just to remind you that the simple criteria I have applied is that it would be good and reasonable if at just 1 out of the 3 Councillors in a ward had an email address and did surgeries so all borough residents were equally treated. I'm not yet suggesting all Councillors should be in this position, though I think it would be a nice idea if they did.

Isn't it amazing that it is the supposedly fuddy-duddy Tories who in the 11 wards they represent you can:
- Phone them
- Email them
- Write to them
- Go to their surgeries.

Isn't it amazing that the Lib Dem Group, that in the mid 80's used tocriticise Tory Councillors for not being accessible are the ones whonowadays tolerate complacency in their Group on this matter.

What would the ALDC say?