Forum Topic

"This newsletter shows that Mrs Ann Keen's support seems only to be directed at some unelected aspiring candidates for Labour....when she perhaps should be helping and supporting the elected local representatives. There seems to be an injustice."How do 'Boucher, McKendry and Sampson working hard for you'. Do they assume that they have channels of influence at the Civic Centre and at Hounslow Homes that is denied to others?"Jim, you have strayed upon the essence of the whole dispute.  The very cause of the ICG's creation and the sole reason for its existence.  New Labour in Isleworth (and one suspects elsewhere) will not work with other organisations unless it can control them.  This is borne out by a wealth of evidence dating back for several years, indeed for decades.Labour implies that it has single-handedly persuaded Thames Water to fork out £40m on an odour improvement programme.  In actual fact this money will come from the public purse in the form of water rates following pressure on OFWAT by the Mogden Residents' Action Group (MRAG) - a non-political, residents' group which does not even get a mention in the Labour election leaflet.  Alan Sheerins is on record as having attacked MRAG through the letters' pages of the local Times.  Now he seeks to give the credit for its work to three individuals, none of whom has even set foot in an MRAG or Mogden Residents' Liaison Committee meeting.New Labour's attitude to other independent groups and associations in Isleworth is similarly aggressive and/or unco-operative.  It attacks Ivytag, yet denies access to its own tenants' association on Ivybridge to many who desire to work for the community.  It tried desperately to sabotage the Isleworth Community Safety Forum (ICSF), which it once controlled, after it had elected an independent Chair.  It tried to take the credit for a project launched by the Worple Avenue Residents' Association (WARA), almost jeopardising a funding application in the process.  This association is chaired by a Labour voter, but being a man who believes in doing things by the book and involving the whole community rather than excluding people on political grounds he appears to have incurred their unrelenting wrath all the same.They are trying to muscle in on the revitalised Residents' Of Worton Estate (ROWE), which is being run independently by residents with the help (but without strings, and only when asked for) of their elected ward councillors.  A few weeks ago the Labour candidates circulated a leaflet which sought to undermine the association's ownership of its own community centre.  In the meantime they keep a watching brief on ROWE through Hounslow Homes, which never ceases its efforts to get a foot in the door, even though the association is running perfectly without it or Labour.It doesn't take a political genius to work out what New Labour has in store for all of these organisations and groups should its candidates be elected in May.As regards the "assumed channels of influence", the simple answer to your question is "yes".  Indeed, you may recall on another thread I pointed out that one of the prospective Labour candidates was using as her selling point the argument that community councillors, no matter how well-intentioned, could not do for local people what Labour councillors could do because we don't have "the right contacts".  Bear in mind that the council officers with whom we work are required under their terms of employment to serve all elected members equally irrespective of political allegiance, and you will understand that the hapless canvasser has actually highlighted the root of the problem in Hounslow.  Not only have these people subverted the very principles of democratic local government in this borough, but they actually brag about it!As community councillors we have endeavoured to help local residents to get involved in the decision-making and consultative processes.  We have encouraged, assisted, and where necessary even helped to set up channels through which the community can express itself without interference.  These independent channels are the very antithesis of everything which New Labour stands for.We have done this against the tide, under a New Labour council which has at best been uphelpful and on many occasions positively obstructive.If, as is our hope, New Labour loses its overall majority next May, we intend to work to create an environment in which universal community participation is actually encouraged.Thus the battle between the organised community and New Labour is not ideological, but organisational.  However it is between two schools of thought which are diametrically and, I fear, irrevocably opposed.New Labour have had their chances to talk things through, and we have been spurned, mocked, abused and insulted at every turn.  Now it is time to put our respective programmes to the voters, so that they can decide for once and for all which of our two approaches to local government they most prefer.  Let's do it.

Phil Andrews ● 7095d

JimSimon has put the links up (for which thanks Simon), so at least they can be accessed easily by anybody who is interested.As far as freeimghosting.com is concerned, I think you are well out of there.  On the last three occasions when I have accessed their site I have had to "Crl-Alt-Del" a particularly aggressive pop-up which does not appear to be removable by any other means.  I don't mind ads with a free service, but this is taking the proverbial.With regards to the leaflet, my guess is that our friend from New Labour TW8 will be rubbing his hands gleefully at our naivete in giving it more publicity than it would otherwise have enjoyed.  However on this occasion I am confident that any voter who has lived in Isleworth for more than a week will notice and be horrified by the sheer dishonesty of it, and that it will backfire.  We are already receiving offers of help and support for next May from some of the most unlikely quarters.  This kind of thing gives the whole political process a bad name and silent indignation in this instance is not enough. We call upon all decent people who wish to put an end to this kind of thing and to restore honesty and openness to our local politics - whatever one's political views or ideology - to help us to do what must be done.  New Labour has a robotic, unthinking "block vote" of people who will vote for it absolutely regardless of its politics or of the tactics it employs, and it is significant.  We cannot allow it to prevail over standards and common decency.If you can leaflet, canvass, send a donation or help in any other way, please PM me or send me an e-mail in complete confidence at phil@communitygroup.org.uk with your details.Many thanks, PA.

Phil Andrews ● 7096d

SimonIt takes a certain class of dipstick to issue a leaflet claiming to have resolved the problems of a bus service which anybody who uses can see is as bad as ever.When the ICG first launched what was to become an ongoing campaign, back in 2000, we managed to persuade the bus operator to upgrade a four-per-hour service to a five-per-hour service.  This was but a minor improvement and it would have been an insult to the intelligence if our local community had we tried to represent it as anything else.Unfortunately the New Labour leaflet to which you refer would only appear to have been distributed to the homes of ICG members and supporters who are known to the Labour Party.  Personally I would much have preferred their dishonesty to have been made evident to a wider audience, but I understand they lack the willing personnel to leaflet a ward properly.I do not believe that Mr. Boucher was responsible for the content of this leaflet, although clearly he and his fellow prospective ward candidates are happy to go along with this appalling style of campaigning.  I believe the motive behind putting these leaflets through the doors of ICG officers and known supporters is to try to give us an impression that New Labour has more strength in the area than it actually does, with a view to persuading us to divert resources into Isleworth ward from Syon and Hounslow South.  In this respect Mr. Boucher and his ward colleagues are being used as fall guys.As far as the 267 service is concerned, this is a big and complex issue which will require a sustained effort over a long period of time on the part of the wider community, assisted where required but not dictated to by their community councillors.The suggestion that this problem was fixed within a week by three chancers operating alone, an alleged petition which nobody has seen and a photo opportunity with the Vice Chair of Tfl, the former socialist Dave Wetzel, is too ridiculous to be taken seriously - which is why nobody does.

Phil Andrews ● 7096d

Hounslow Council has also received complaints about the 267.  I have personally spoken to several complainants and have attempted to obtain an objective picture of the issue.I have spoken to London United’s service controller at Fulwell Garage and to their bus priority manager.  I have also spoken to key people in London Buses.  It appears that a few weeks ago there were some problems with the traffic signals at Kew Bridge junction.  This was conformed by TfL’s traffic signals people:-“We received complaints regarding eastbound bus delays at (this junction) a while back.  The delays experienced at this junction were found to be due to faulty detectors at this site.  The database was amended to allow more time to this stage until the detectors were fixed.  These problems are still being investigated.  Please also note there is likely to be heavier traffic here due to Battersea Bridge being closed.”There have also been signal-timing changes at Chiswick roundabout.  These were based on a very thorough review by TfL, who have commented:-  “The cycle times have been lowered and in most cases traffic capacities from the entry arms have been reduced.  This has been done to produce a more stable roundabout and to limit exit blocking, both onto the roundabout and at its exits.  Care has been taken with this process to ensure buses clear in 1 cycle where possible and that the A4 Offslip (westbound) remains uncongested.”From observation, the roundabout is working quite well, except for occasional delays due to excessively heavy traffic flows.Meanwhile, Hounslow Council has been implementing bus priority measures designed to improve bus service speeds and reliability.  Work on Chiswick High Road between Chiswick Roundabout and Acton Lane is nearing completion.  We are waiting upon TfL to finishing the installation of pedestrian signals at three locations.  Conversion of zebra crossings to pelican signals will improve traffic flows and especially bus times as the signals respond to buses in the near vicinity, if necessary slightly delaying the start of the green man to let the buses through.  Other work along route 267 is in the pipeline (including a possible bus priority scheme from Syon Lane to Brent Lea and improvements to bus lanes and traffic signals at Stamford Brook) but these are still some months away.You may say that delays at Kew Bridge, Chiswick Roundabout and elsewhere in Brentford and Chiswick shouldn’t affect the timings of inbound buses through Twickenham and Isleworth.  The problem is that there are only so many buses in service and if some of them are excessively delayed on an inbound trip they will be so late coming back to Fulwell that they will be very late for (or miss) their next trip.  A certain amount of catch-up time is built into the timetable at each end, but this can be exceeded by very severe traffic delays en route.  I suspect that route 237 services are also affected,  but as they are a bit more frequent it’s possible that people aren’t aware of late running buses on that route.This does not mean to say that other problems (such as driver non-availability) hasn’t also been involved, and I will be speaking again to London United and TfL to emphasise that we expect them to do everything in their power to provide a consistent, reliable and fully staffed service.  Chris Calvi-FreemanHead of TransportLondon Borough of Hounslow

Chris Calvi-Freeman ● 7103d

EstelleI hope that when you speak to Chris and Sue you will ask them a few questions about claims made earlier through the pages of your newspaper.Take a look at the following snippets:Letter from Chris Boucher, published 16th September 2005.Letter from Vivian Farr, published 7th October 2005.Letter from "Name and address supplied", published 11th November 2005.These three letters are self-evidently an integral part of the same Labour campaign.  In the first, Chris claims that his party has already achieved the bus service review.  In the second, Ms. Farr is clearly enjoying the new service which has allegedly been introduced ahead of schedule.  In the last, however, we are told that the new service has not yet been launched after all, which explains the fact that the service is still as poor as ever.The introduction of new buses, we are being asked to believe, was a direct consequence of Chris and Sue having handed a petition to Dave Wetzel of Transport for London.  The two prospective New Labour candidates were photographed presenting the petition in your issue of 2nd September 2005.  Mr. Wetzel announced the introduction of the new buses in the same article.  So we are being asked to believe that, within the space of a week, a policy decision was taken to replace all the vehicles (at a cost of hundreds of thousands of pounds each) on a major bus route as a consequence of a few signatures on a petition.  Is anybody seriously expected to buy this?Mr. Wetzel is, of course, a former Labour leader of Hounslow Council and, in spite of New Labour's lurch to the right, in the manner of his kind his organisational loyalty will always take precedence over any consideration of ideology or principle.All Chris and Sue have in fact achieved is a publicity scoop, courtesy of a political crony whose wage bill is footed by the taxpayer.I've no interest in becoming embroiled in some tacky auction with the Labour Party over who can achieve the most "on behalf of" local people.  Good councillors from any political party or from none will achieve things for their constituents.  What the ICG offers, which New Labour cannot, is unconditional support for the community in every instance which is never dependent upon whether or not the community's wishes accord with the policy line of a political party.  That is what will set our candidates, whomever they may turn out to be, apart from Chris and Sue.What I object to in this instance is the clearly (and characteristically) fraudulent nature of the New Labour claims to have been responsible for the introduction of the new buses.  They are just the latest in a series of attempts to pull the wool over the eyes of the local electorate and, yes, it angers me that they have such a low opinion of the intelligence of my constituents.I believe, and hope, that their contempt and arrogance will rebound on them.

Phil Andrews ● 7125d