Why Vote Green?

The Mid Beds District Council election is all about local not national issues. I have been asked several times why am I standing as Green Party Candidate and not an Independent. Well there are two answers to this. Firstly it takes a lot of effort to make voters aware of who you are and what you stand for. For this you need a number of supporters and helpers who leaflet and spread the word. A Party organisation can help with this. This is probably why most of the seats in Mid Beds have one or more Party Candidates and very few Independents. Secondly and more importantly I happen to agree with most of what the Green Party stands for.

The Green Party if very focused on local issues. Greens believe in government being as local and participative as practically possible. Greens concern for protecting the environment means putting a human dimension back into development, designing homes and neighbourhoods with character and for our needs, revitalising old buildings, reusing wasteland and not destroying green fields. Similarly encouraging public transport and making roads safer for walkers and cyclists is another key Green aim. The Green Party promotes local shops and services something we desperately need in our villages. Climate Change is a Global issue but it needs local action to tackle it. The Green Party promotes energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy something dear to my heart.

There are already some 93 Green Councillors and with a record number of candidates it looks like there will more after these elections. Green Councillors can make a difference. In Norwich, Greens on the Council have secured 20 mph resident’s zones and increased renewable energy requirements for new developments. A Green Councillor in London was even responsible for ensuring that Arsenal Football Club retained cycle stands outside its new Stadium. As an Arsenal fan I have to admit to being a bit concerned that my favourite club was considering reneging on what was a planning commitment!

There is more information about the Green Party and these local elections at http://www.greenparty.org.uk/nextelection

Making our roads safer

This is one of the big issues which keeps cropping up. The roads are not safe for pedestrians or cyclists for a number of reasons. They are too narrow; cars travel too fast; the few pavements we have are insufficient and there is too much traffic just passing through our villages using our roads as a “rat run”. I have been given a number of suggestions on how to improve the situation, (not all repeatable on this Blog!) but here are some I intend to push:

Access for pedestrians and cyclists:

Improve the condition of the pavements we have and add more.
Put in pedestrian crossings near Flitton & Greenfield Village Hall (for access to the hall and recreation ground) and near the Cornerway Garage (for parents walking their children to school).
Ideally have pavements and cycleways linking the villages e.g. Warhedges to Silsoe, Greenfield to Pulloxhill, Flitton to Pulloxhill and Greenfield to Flitwick.

Car speeds

Silsoe Road and Sand Lane should have 30 mph speed limits.
Pulloxhill Road past Greenfield School should be 20 mph as should the approach along Flitton Road between Holmewood Road and Joes Close.
Outside the existing 30 mph zones there should be a maximum speed limit of 40 mph for our narrow country lanes in the area bounded by the A507 to the North, the A6 to the East and South and Flitwick and Westoning in the West. The CPRE have a Quiet Lanes campaign which suggests even lower speed limits are required.

Traffic Calming

Within the villages themselves we need to slow cars right down in the danger zones where people have to cross the road and where there are blind corners such as opposite the church in Flitton or in Barton Road as it enters Pulloxhill.

Some of these measures such as the Traffic Calming and new pavements are costly and so will take time to implement. But changing speed signs would hardly cost anything and would hopefully change the mind set of people using our country roads as a trunk route to the motorway. We need a vision for how we want to improve the roads in our villages so that when opportunities (funding) arise we can grasp them.

Pulloxhill meeting about Traveller Sites

I visited the Old Acre Gypsy site on Barton Road yesterday as I thought it would be important to have an idea of what it was like ahead of the meeting at Pulloxhill Church Hall this afternoon. I have to say the site was tidy and Mr Fury who I spoke to and who runs the site seemed a very pleasant person. He explained his main motivation for setting up the site was to provide the children with a secure education - something they struggled to do when on the move. His children and grandchildren live on the site in eight caravans. He has lived most of his life in Bedfordshire and stressed he was a Gypsy rather that a Traveller.

The meeting in Pulloxhilll Church Hall was just as packed as Flitton Village Hall on Thursday although being a smaller venue I estimate there were around 150 to 200 people there. The meeting was chaired by Roy Van De Poll Vice Chair of the Parish Coucil and the panel again included Cllr Patricia Turner leader of the District Council but this time there was no County representative and no MP on the panel(which meant we kept to the isssue at hand rather political point scoring). Richard Holden who is Planning Services Portfolio Holder at the District Council was also on the panel.

The meeting was much more focused (than the Flitton meeting) on how to respond to the consultation and also the merits of the existing sites in the locality. The Gypsy family from the Hermitage lane site were present and I also think a representative of the Old Acre Site spoke up at one point. It seemed to be generally accepted (but not by all) that given sites had to be found somewhere in the District that the Hermitage Lane site and the Old Acre site on the road to Barton had certain merits as they were small family owned and run sites which were causing no problems. Tricia Turner stressed that in her experience these were the kind of sites which caused least problems and were the type which the council preferred - i.e no more than 10 caravans and privately owned and run. The site proposed in Greenfield Road opposite the school however did not seem to meet the criteria for a good site nor did the two Flitton sites. However she stressed that no decision had been taken and people should express their views by filling in the questionaire or by writing to the Council. The deadline is the 30th April so make sure you get your response in soon. If you would like to talk to me about the issue or want help with the questionaire please phone me on 0780 9873124 or email me on gareth.ellis.flitton@ntlworld.

Folly Wood and Flitwick Moor

I distributed some leafets yesterday given to me by Dave Sedgely for the campaign by Bedfordshire Wildlife Trust to buy Folly Wood. Dave is trying to get make as many people aware as possible of the opportunity to secure this unique site right next Flitwick Moor. For more information see http://www.wildlifebcnp.org/whats-new-story70.htm. I know a lot of people lobbied the District Council to protect Flitwick Moor when neighbouring land was under threat from Developers. This is an opportunity to extend and increase the security of the Moor.

Traveller sites meeting in Flitton

The local Parish Council held a meeting concerning the current consultation by Mid Beds District Council on Traveller and Gipsy sites. There must have been several hundred people inside and outside the village hall last night (I hear the estimate is 500). Certainly the most I have seen in a village meeting in my 12 years in Flitton! The meeting was chaired by Nick Thompson who, with the help of others in the Parish Council, had done a terrific job organising it at such short notice . Also in attendance were Nadine Dorries local Conservative MP, Cllr Patricia Turner leader of the District Council, Cllr Richard Stay deputy leader of the County Council.

The meeting was tense with obviously some real concerns amongst most people about the proposed sites in and around Flitton, Greenfield and Pulloxhill. There was much discussion about the politics behind the current situation, with claims that a Conservative Government would take away the obligation imposed by the current Government on a local council to find sites. Even if true this seemed to miss the point of the meeting, which was to address how best to respond to the current consultation. This is a local issue and the key thing is to make sure everyone does respond to the consultation. Questionaires were being given out at the meeting but for those who didnt get a one they can be downloaded at http://www.midbeds.gov.uk/services/planning/local_plan/gypsy_and_traveller_development_plan_document.asp

We all need to respond even though the present consultation for proposed sites is seriously flawed. Some of the sites seem to have been chosen almost at random (this certainly applies to some of the County Council owned sites which have now been withdrawn). The sustainability appraisal for the sites which accompanies the consultation is full of errors and inconsistencies. There is much reference to local facilites (such as shops and healthcare) which these villages don't have. The questionaire is not easy to fill in and does not allow enough space for commenting on the potential impacts of the proposed sites on the local environment and community. Nor does it address the key sustainability criteria set out in "Circular 01/06 (ODPM): Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites" which can be found on the Governments DCLG web. site http://www.communities.gov.uk/

I will be filling in the questionaire but also writing to the Council to suggest they take the sustainability of the sites more seriously and that they re-consult us properly once they have a had a chance to digest the huge response they get from this first round.