Forum Topic

Scarmongering on Gunnersbury Park

I see from the newsstand today that Ann Keen MP has jumped on the bandwagon of spreading alarm about Gunnersbury Park saying that it could end up under a sea of concrete.The park is a victim of decades of neglect that her party presided over. It now requires funding to bring it back to its former glory that would be way beyond the resources of the current administration. With no sensible funding ideas being put forward that could secure the future of the park without some form of development of a section of it there will have to be a compromise. Nobody wants the buildings to continue to decay in the way they have been allowed to or see the park itself look so down at heel. A plan needs to proceed that gives up some of the site to fund the rest. The choice is between a large park which is little used because of its condition and a fractionally smaller one that is of a standard that local residents deserve.

Mike Hardacre ● 6475d98 Comments

The Mela is a free event, not a commercial one. It is always very difficult to get an answer to the question you ask; it depends on who you ask. We are often told that the Mela actually makes a loss and that no benefit comes to the Park; in fact all it does is damage the ground with the parking and particularly the very heavy fair vehicles. But it was seen as a political decision in that they used to claim it was Ken who wanted it here and that it brought prestige to the Park. Now we have another Mayor and nothing's changed. Who can believe anything they tell us?Bela

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6121d

Sorry BelaAs stated I read through all the posts one after the other and appear to be mistaken over where you live. However I am still a little confused over your twenty year fight over commercialisation. Where did you stand on the Mela. It seems to be commercialisation of the park to me. Can anyone tell me how it differs from any other form of commercialisation.I would also like to know how much money is given to the park for this advent and what percentage of the profit it represents, can anyone tell me.

Philip Walsh ● 6121d

Jim Lawes ● 6123d

Jim Lawes ● 6123d

Thanks Michael.Here are some pictures I took a couple of years back to remind us of what we're discussing. First of all a commemorative plaque regarding the era to 1952.OoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooThe large mansion (currently the Museum..and accommodation on top floors?)OooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooThe Small mansionooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Jim Lawes ● 6123d

Gunnersbury park was not bequeathed (as with several other parks in the vicinity) but was purchased by the Borough of Ealing and Corporation of Acton.As I understand it, The site was too expensive and was larger incorporating land north of Popes Lane.The final purchase included the sale of the land to the north and the Boundaries of the park to be defined by a perimeter of land for development - Hence the houses along Popes Lane and the Northern end of Lionel road. At some stage, development along Lionel Road was stopped and during this period the land on the left transferred to Brentford and Chiswick who used it for council housing whilst Ealing used it's surplus purchased land to build the  Garden council estate north of Popes Lane.After 1965 the Boroughs of Ealing and Hounslow were formed and I'm sure that that's when the park was shared. The full correct details are I think on the Friends of Gunnersbury park website.As a footnote, Gunnersbury park features in the Ealing Movie, The Lavender Hill Mob.

Michael Brandt ● 6123d

Why is the Park managed by a Joint Committee of both Ealing and Hounslow Boroughs, when it is clearly, I believe, within the boundaries of LBH?The joint management arrangement might need changing.Why has there been such long term neglect?  Mind you it's a big garden with a couple of Houses to look after!Relax with the view of one of the ponds.

Jim Lawes ● 6124d

The £10 car charge for the Mela was designed to deter people from driving rather than to raise income.I also back onto the park and the worst thing of all, to my mind, would be to have more 'events' with the attendant traffic chaos.Traffic for this year's Mela was much better organised than in many previous years, but there was still something close to gridlock at closing time -- 8:30pm to 9pm -- in all directions.

Susan Kelly ● 6124d

Not sure if it's the same Ron Bartholomew but he used to be a Labour Councillor for Syon ward.

Adam Beamish ● 6124d

I don't know where you got the idea that I live in Southall. I live in Brentford and my house backs onto Gunnersbury Park.I don't remember the name Ron Bartholomew but rock concerts have been occasionally proposed for the Park and rejected, not just by the local people but by councillors themselves.Bela

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6124d

Incidentally, does anyone anywhere publish profit/loss figures for the Mela. It would be interesting to know who pays what, who receives what and whether any of the cash spent/raised could be diverted into the upkeep of the park. I noticed that car-parking was £10 per car this year - quite an income!

Mick Brent ● 6124d

I have just read all the post on this thread in one sitting, (quiet day) and I must say it would only have taken half as long to read if the local councillors, party activist and Politicians poodles, sorry politicians representatives had either, not posted or at least stuck to the point of this thread. Personally I am sick of the lot of them and the constant regurgitated spite and politicly orientated drivel that they seem compelled to ladle into every posting on the forum. Lets get back on course.Bela, your post has left me with a few questions, you state that you have spent twenty years campaigning over the commercialising of Gunnersbury park. Yet you live in Southall, the parks in the same borough but not that close, so how come you have such active involvement in its affairs. do you use it often.Around twenty years ago a proposal was put forward by a Mr Ron Bartholomew a concert/festival promoter to hire Gunnersbury park a couple of times a year. This would have been an opportunity to finance many things and would have promoted the name of the park. It was opposed on the commercialisation argument. I was wondering, were you around then? and if so, did you oppose, and if it was proposed now, would you oppose it on the grounds of commercialism.As for my own view on the idea of selling of bits of the park for houses for 'rich folk', we can be sure they are not for the poor. Its basic thievery isn't it! No matter how its dressed up in a brochure. This seems underlined as such by the apparent wording of the voting options. There is however the possibility that it was not only, not well thought out but poorly worded as well.

Philip Walsh ● 6124d

Interesting article on the front page of the Site today: http://www.brentfordtw8.com/default.asp?section=property&page=stats0908.htmIt looks like the only way to save Gunnersbury Park is to build loads of flats which no-one will be able to sell!

Mick Brent ● 6127d

I have no idea why you should think I was addressing you. I was replying to Paul Fisher who admitted in his posting that he did not have time to attend all meetings and know about all subjects and yet continues to state that the threat of housing on Gunnersbury Park is nothing but scaremongering, despite the fact that people are at the moment being asked to vote on the plan.Bela

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6136d

BelaI promised you that Phil Andrews would misrepresent my previous posting. He never disappoints!As you can see, Phil has a problem with the fact that I live in Southall. It is hardly surprising that he has a problem with the town (after all, he did spend twelve years in the National Front).Yet Southall is part of the London borough of Ealing - and that is where my council tax goes to. And guess what? Ealing has joint responsibility for the park! So I am entitled to express my point of view.Phil ends by complaining that the park is something that doesn't affect his own ward and seems to question why he should get involved - yet both he and his colleague Paul Fisher are quite happy to attack you for "scaremongering" on the issue.By the way, his comment regarding the Ivybridge AGM is untruthful. I was emailed by a non-politically affiliated nearby local resident on that issue and merely posted a comment congratulating Al-ayoby for being elected chair (on the grounds that he is best at representing people from diverse backgrounds). Phil immediately accused me of undermining Al-ayoby and now, quite hilariously, claims that I've got my fingers "burnt" on this issue.The truth is, Phil is still smarting because he has lost political control of the estate. To Phil, everything is about "control".

Robin Taylor ● 6137d

BellaI guess I am one of your "certain people" who doesn't know what he is talking about, however if there are other less contentious options for Gunnersbury Park than that which has been mooted and somebody who actually wanted me to take an interest were to furnish me with the facts I would be keen to look into this (no pun intended).On the other hand you may prefer to alert Robin of Southall, a man who carries a huge amount of clout in the corridors of power at Hounslow.Robin has demonstrated the extent of his commitment to the local environment in Hounslow by butting into this discussion and stirring the pot, in the same way that he and others attempted to do when they thought they detected a whiff of unrest following the recent AGM on Ivybridge.  Fortunately they got their fingers burnt on that one and things are hopefully improving in spite of their efforts.  I think it unlikely that the future of Gunnersbury Park was at the forefront of Robin's mind when he barged into this discussion to deliver his judgement, a thing he seems to consider essential before any project in Hounslow can progress.Speaking personally, if I am going to give up my time to get involved in an issue which doesn't greatly affect my own ward I would want to be satisfied that the object of the exercise is to preserve a local amenity rather than political showboating.  In my experience one usually works to the absolute detriment of the other.

Phil Andrews ● 6137d

Thank you for your support. The more I see of how (certain) people behave, the more determined I am to stay clear of politics!I have been fighting for Gunnersbury Park for 20 years and bullies don't put me off - quite the opposite. Usually they don't know what they're talking about and have to resort to personal insult and blustering. I will continue to fight for what I believe in and what is worth fighting for, one of our most beautiful parks. All of good faith are welcome to join me.Bela

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6138d

There is an alternative to losing 6 acres of Gunnersbury Park, cutting down a number of trees, etc. Carville Hall Park North is just across Lionel Road and could provide the site for housing without destruction of nature or disruption to people. This should be fully and seriously considered as a much less intrusive and destructive solution.Bela

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6138d

Paul: there are now definite plans to build extra houses on the park. I am not necessarily opposed to these plans as they may represent the least worst option, but am puzzled as to why you continue to refer to them as scaremongering.

Susan Kelly ● 6138d

You see, Bela, this is what you come up against when you try and take a genuine concern in your local environment. You get accused of being in league with Ann Keen.It was perfectly reasonable for you to contact Ann last August to help with your campaign (just as you contacted local Lib Dem councillor Andrew Dakers) because Ann is, after all, your democratically-elected MP.But Paul Fisher, Phil Andrews and other ICG councillors do not approve of people getting help from Ann. The reason? Because Ann (quite rightly) raised her concerns about Phil's long-term past involvement in the National Front when the Conservatives appointed him to an influential post in the council cabinet.That's why all of this bullying goes on - whereby Ann is smeared, lied about (and even has her political opponents encouraging squatters to take over the house that she herself paid for out of her own money ten years before she entered Parliament). I say: let's not give in to the bullies.I wish you well in your non-political campaign, Bela. I and my friends occasionally visit Gunnersbury Park museum and Mela and hope you succeed in keeping as much of the land for public use as possible - and that your campaign is strengthened by as much support as possible from people of all parties and none.(NB: This post will attract misrepresentations from members and supporters of the ICG. Please ignore them).

Robin Taylor ● 6138d

I guess you makes friends easily eh Bella!!Perhaps its you and Ann Keen encouraging all the scaremongouring?

Paul Fisher ● 6138d

Yes, always best not to make statements when one is not sure of the facts.If there's anything else I can help you with, don't hesitate to ask.Bela

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6138d

Unfortunately I do not get the time to read every document in the Borough or attend every meeting held especially outside the ward I represent so on that note I think its best if I retire from this thread now.

Paul Fisher ● 6138d

The plans are no longer secret. We are being asked to vote on them as per Question 11 a) on the GP Consultation document. Are you not aware of this document? We have proposed Carville Hall Park North as an alternative site for the housing development. Were you not at the last stakeholders' meeting on 30 July?Hope that answers your questions.And, by the way, I am known as Bela.

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6138d

I can assure you that I dont know of any "secret plans" to sell off part of Gunnersbury Park and would genuinely like to hear what alternatives residents have come up with Maria?

Paul Fisher ● 6138d

If we don't vote no to housing on GP, it'll be the thin end of the wedge and slice by slice you'll see the Park whittled away. You know now that I don't go in for scaremongering - this will be the dismal future however much they deny it. We all know how much credence we can put on their assurances: weren't we promised we would have 4 options to vote on? And please don't try to ascribe to me political motives I do not have. I am neither Conservative, Labour, LibDem or anything else. I'm simply pro-Gunnersbury Park and will work with anyone who is likeminded.Bela

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6138d

As you can see, my warnings of secret plans by Ealing and Hounslow Councils to sell off part of Gunnersbury Park for housing were not scaremongering but fact. We are now being asked to vote on it. It is absolutely outrageous how the critical question has been put: it's either a) vote to do nothing or b) vote for housing. It's a shameless, blatant attempt to force the outcome they want by saying 'Our way or no way.' I encourage everyone who can vote (there are forms available at the Museum) to tick option a) in question 12 to show them we are not stupid and have seen through their strong-arm tactics and to force them to consider seriously the alternative some residents have come up with.Bela

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6138d

Paul's correct. The feeling has been that it would best spent as 'seed' money for whatever funding sources may be appropriate.

Matt Harmer ● 6146d

I have checked with Officers and the £250,000 from scheme 11 still remains to be spent though luckily there is no time limit.

Paul Fisher ● 6146d

Actually it is the stable block which is on the at risk register - and why don't English Heritage come up with some plan rather than just a note on a register

Patricia Nicholas ● 6146d

yes it has.  Most on restoring the garden area and Princes Amelia's bathhouse

Patricia Nicholas ● 6146d

I may be wrong but I believe the £250,000 S106 contribution from the Gas Works has not yet been spent or even allocated though I am sure perhaps Cllr Matt Harmer can clarify that.

Paul Fisher ● 6146d

It isnt the scapbook that needs delving into.  Try the financial accounts of both boroughs as well as the minutes of the Jt. Committee.  Substantial money was invested inthe park - not least the S106 money fromthe British Gas site in Brentford.  The decision to remove the artists using the small mansion was foolish.  If they weren't doing enought o ensure the upkeep of the building with, obviously, financial input from other sources, then why not renegotiate?  The truth is there has never been enough money to do much more than keep the buildings ticking over and more investment is needed if they are to be used commercially without damaging their surroundings and increasing vehicle use in the park.Housing will not be the answer.  It has been considered before and not progressed because of its impact on the park.  Maybe more pressure should be placed on  national organisations to assist. e.g. English Heritage, National Trust.Perhaps, also, we could keep the the question of the park and stop raking over old ground for dubious political purposes.

Patricia Nicholas ● 6146d

For goodness sake Robin, Phil, Jim and co. Please grow up and stop name calling and point scoring over petty childish points. Almost every topic on this forum decends into the same diatribe. It achieves nothing  and is exactly the sort of 'politics' that is turning away people in droves from trying to contribute and getting involved in trying to make this town a better place.This constant sniping over Labour, Tory and groups no-one outside of politics has heard of is not a relevant issue in most things. If it is explain the facts, not unsubstantiated opinions.Some stuff on here is not far short of libelous and actual facts and verifiable information is being muddied by such nonsense.More to the point, there are serious issues arising and party politics has no place in sorting them out if it is always going to descend into what quite frankly would shame a class of 6 year olds.This should be an exchange of information and ideas and yes. opinions but should be described as such. The level of backbiting is out of date and out of touch.

Michael Brandt ● 6146d

Neil,You're missing the point. This thread was about alleged scaremongering in relation to plans for Gunnersbury Park.Phil Andrews and others claimed that rumours relating to the development of the park were baseless. It is now known that those rumours were based upon truth.

Robin Taylor ● 6146d

Paul is correct, Labour did very little for heritage in the Borough. The first upgrades on Boston Manor House and Hogarth House were achieved via lottery money and the hard work of a dedicated team. Almost all of the positions in Heritage have been lost and not by the current administration.Gunnersbury has been on the "At risk Register" for more years than I can remember. Its tme for tough decisions, do Ealing and LBH preserve all the park or build. This has always been one of the problems though, the fact that two Councils are involved.Regards Anne Keen, did she talk to the Lbour admin when English Heritage kept making noises about the state of the buildings?It would be interesting to know what the views of English Heritage are?It would be in

Neil Chippendale ● 6146d

Okay, 25k man.

Robin Taylor ● 6146d

Red RobboPlease delve in to your Hounslow Scrapbook and tell us all how much investment was made in to maintaining these treasured houses in our Borough?To save you the trouble the answer is diddly squat as well you know and your comrades would have left them to rot away rather then spend some cash and hence why this administration is yet again picking up the pieces from your beloved regime.You really a bitter bitter man arent you and how it must grind your gears knowing that at last Hounslow is delivering on all its promises and you can only look on from Southall with your pal P Haling.

Paul Fisher ● 6147d

Do they pay you £25k of council taxpayer's money to come out with tosh like that?

Robin Taylor ● 6147d

What a shame the previous Labour Council let our heritage decline to such a state over so many years and yet are now shedding crocadile tears.Does Ann Keen even know where Gunnersbury Park is I wonder seeing as she has not lived in the Borough for so long?

Paul Fisher ● 6147d

A cursory glance through this thread reveals a lot about the mentality of the ICG. In a number of his postings, Phil Andrews derides those who are concerned about the park's future for allegedly crying wolf.For example, on one thread (31/10/08) he states:-"The problem with treating false rumour as though it were fact is that one encourages the purveyors of such information to continue with their scaremongering."Of course, this "scaremongering" related to "false" rumours that part of the park was being earmarked for development.Subsequently it has been confirmed that this is, indeed, what Hounslow and Ealing councils have been planning. Of course, anyone who disagrees with the plans (or who raises concerns about them) is deemed to be in cahoots with the Labour Party. Even the protest organiser herself - Bela Cunha - is criticised for involving Ann Keen. But why shouldn't she? Ann is, after all, the democratically elected MP (but not one that the ICG approves of, of course). As Bela Cunha herself states, Ann Keen was contacted by the campaign in August 2008 - as indeed was Lib Dem PPC Andrew Dakers - yet Ann alone was attacked by ICG aliases in the local press for "jumping on the bandwagon".We now have the former manager of Gunnersbury Park's Small Mansion Arts Centre attacking the local authority's plans for a luxury housing development and demanding that the land should be retained for public use. Will he too be tarred with the 'Labour Party' brush by the oh so environmentally concerned ICG?

Robin Taylor ● 6147d

Front page

Sarah Felstead ● 6147d

The back page says LBE & LBH.

Sarah Felstead ● 6147d

SarahWas this communication from the London Borough of Hounslow?

Phil Andrews ● 6147d

I have just found a white A4 blank envelope through the front door - no indication of what is inside.  Often these go straight in the recycling box as they are unwanted circulars.I did open this one to find a glossy brochure/questionnaire titled 'The Future of Gunnersbury Park Consultation'.Shouldn't there be something printed on the envelope to indicate what is inside?  Or maybe the outer packing could be a see through plastic (recyclable of course) envelope?  We get so much rubbish mail it is a shame not to make the survey distinguishable from the junk stuff we don't read before placing it in the green box.  :-(

Sarah Felstead ● 6147d

Of course politcal priorities come into it.  The point is that the park now seems to be pretty low down in the priorities and therefore is vulnerable to commercial pressures.  And of course Ann Keen would be approached as the MP but she doesnt have to support each and every request. THe fact is that she has always supported efforts to keep Gunnersbury Park as a park and not a commercial venture - whether the problems arose because of Labour or Tory administrations.Im afraid that in the real world politics is a driving force and indeed without it we would have anarchy

Patricia Nicholas ● 6398d

One problem was the fact that if one Council made a cut the other had too as the budget had to be the same for both Council's.

Neil Chippendale ● 6398d

Don't know why you're getting so het up! Of course it used to be the Joint Committee, exactly as you say, which 'had responsibility, made joint decisions, etc', but all of us who attended those meetings saw the lack of progress caused by the fact that it was easy for one council to delay, blame the other, etc. etc. Then we had the Regeneration Board, still suffering from the same problem of joint control. We await to see what new committee will emerge next. I never said people tried to make party political points at the meetings. It's people outside - including you in your previous posting - who bring politics into it, when Gunnersbury in fact has suffered under all administrations. People blame the new Conservative administration, others blame the old Labour administration, people accuse Ann Keen of jumping on the bandwagon (she is the local MP - who else is one supposed to approach?)The words Labour and Conservative should be banned from all discussions about the future of Gunnersbury Park. Everyone should be pulling i the same direction to try to save the park, irrespective of their political affiliations. I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear before.Bela

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6399d

Rubbish.  Gunnersbury is managed by a joint committee made up of members from both Ealing & Hounslow councils.  They and their ruling groups therefore have complete responsibility for the care or lack of it of Gunnersbury park.  They make their decisions jointly and certainly never point scored because, although the meetings were open to the public, they were not conducted in a confrontational manner.

Patricia Nicholas ● 6399d

I do wish people, however well intentioned, would stop trying to score political points off each other over Gunnersbury Park. The root of the problem lies in the fact that the Park belongs to two Councils,  so no one takes responsibility to run it properly and it is easy to shift blame on to the other Council for neglect, mismanagement, lack of decision-making  and investment, etc, which has resulted in the sad deterioration of the Park - under both parties.Bela

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6399d

It is quite untrue that the park has been neglected for decades.  A large amount of money has been spent every year on maintenance.  Money from theGas Board land, which had always been earmarked for the Park under S.106 was made available and used to improve the bathhouse and the japanese garden. On a number of occasions in the past 30 years there have been attempts to build commercially in the park.  The Rothschilds left the park to the two boroughs for the use of all the residents and visitors to the area.  There has always been a problem relating to the stables and if money cannot be found, or Lottery funding obtained for refurbishment or some related arts/community development then frankly I have always felt they should be allowed to continue their slow decline.A lot of money was allocated to the mainenance of the park and this was done successfully on a tight budget for many years and, in addition, restoration of the orangery, use of the small mansion by artists who provided community art sessions in school holidays; restoration of the bathhouse and the japanese gardens.During those 20+ years there have been a number of attempts by people to develop part of the park for commercial reasons.These have been fought off by the community and, with the support of Ann Keen at all times. So no more talk of jumping on the bandwagon - Ann stood firm whether it was Labour or, as now, the Tories, running things.Certainly over the past several years the park has been allowed to decline - but that is the result of budgetary decisions by the Tory councils.  And shame on them.

Patricia Nicholas ● 6399d

It's good to see that your utter contempt for the residents of the Worton estate and their wishes has not abated after all these years Vanessa, and notwithstanding the fact that we disagree on this particular issue I have nothing but admiration for your determination not to give into them even at the cost of your council seat.I am glad you have raised the issue of Brabazon, because it provides the impartial observer with an interesting comparison between my way of doing things and the New Labour way.On Brabazon I have established contact with the residents and will shortly be meeting them to try to establish precisely what their concerns are and to see where the plans can be adjusted accordingly.  I have instructed Hounslow Homes that we should do absolutely everything we can to satisfy the existing residents on the estate and to work with them rather than against them.  By contrast your policy on Worton was first say nothing, then try to deceive residents with a Mugabean "survey" which was worded in such a way that it could only possibly deliver the answer you wanted, then, when that and all else failed, subject them all to verbal abuse.Incidentally, I understand the plans for New Build on the Brabazon - much needed social housing, not the "millionares (sic) housing estate" of Ellar/K££n mythology (maybe Ann is hoping the taxpayer will shell out again and buy her one as the price of her support?) - are being opposed by New Labour.  How do you square that one Vanessa?

Phil Andrews ● 6408d

There is a world of difference between Gunnersbury Park and what was a dog fouled, motor bike race track, no matter how romatically it was portrayed for the sake of dramatic effect,and it also overlooks the fact that people were living in the most appalling conditions in those awful bungalows on Worton Estate which were an affront to decency.  Worton Estate also has very close access to Redlees Park literally minutes away plus everyone there had a garden. I would also like to ask how this is squared with the proposed building on a green area in Brabazon Road being mooted?

Vanessa Smith ● 6409d

I don't think expressing concern about a proposal, debated in secret, to take a substantial part of the park and develop it as a gated estate of "top end" housing is jumping on a bandwagon. I am sure lots of residents were horrified at the idea. One only has to look at nearby Bushey Park to see how quickly large private developments can be placed in a park.Hounslow has a huge amount of green space and parks to manage and has never got any additional funds to do it, so all the expense falls on the council tax. It was very generous that these huge estates were gifted to local authorities many decades ago but local authorities struggle to find the huge sums that would be needed to do them justice. This is not just a problem for Hounslow and Ealing.Chiswick park is probably the best example of where the local authority managed to bring in substantial external funding in collaboration with English Heritage in order to renovate the house and grounds. This was the model that the last administration looked towards  as a way forward for Gunnesbury Park. I appreciate renovation of this park and the buildings in it, is always going to be a difficult task but do I think a little more imagination is needed to take the park forward than just filling it with an exclusive millionares housing estate.

Colin Ellar ● 6409d

MichaelThere is certainly such a connection and the material you have directed us all to is useful, many thanks.We used much of this type of material in our campaign against the Worton Green development some years back.

Phil Andrews ● 6409d

Hi BelaI think today's issue of the Lancet may be of interest to you.  This article examines the connection between green space and health with respect to income inequality.  It finds that living near green space improves mortality experience for all income groups.  In particular it reduces mortality rates between least and most deprived.This is a very large study - 366,000 people in England between 2001-2005.I have referred to the article in a posting today Green Space and Health on brentfordtw8.There have been many previous studies of the relationship between health and green space - For quick summaries see:-http://www.themedguru.com/articles/green_spaces_bridge_health_gap_scottish_researchers-86116540.htmlhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7714950.stmThere are many green articles which support the Gunjnersbury Park case from a people's health perspective:-"Health Evidence Base  for the Mayor's Draft Cultural Strategy" Ben Case, Adam Coutts 2002"Healthy Sustainable Communities What Works?" Ben Cave, Peter Molyneux, Adam Coutts 2004 (Ben Cave Associates)"Healthy Parks Healthy People A Review of Current Literature" Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences, Melbourne 2002

Michael Fletcher ● 6409d

Thank you for the link Bela. I do hope that Hounslow & Ealing Councils will do their best to keep Gunnersbury intact and remember the transaction in 1925 between Mrs.Rothschild and Acton & Ealing Councils when civic pride and philanthropy saved the park from housing development.Although MP`s catch the limelight it will need strong leadership by councillors which isn`t easy in todays larger and diverse boroughs.

Robert Darke ● 6411d

Robert,Firstly, I am known by everybody as Bela (not Maria). If you agree with us, please join us - check our website - www.gunnersburyparkcovenant.com. To put forward your views, come to the open meetings at the Small Mansion, held by Richard Gill, for stakeholders to have their say.We would all like to see the boating lake being reinstated, along with the fishing, the bowling, etc. etc. as it used to be not all that long ago.That's an innovative idea you suggest. Whether it's possible to do that or not I don't know.Bela

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6412d

As an Ealing resident with fondness of Gunnersbury Park I would like to thank Maria and her group for raising awareness to the wider area and for achieving some transparency.With the huge amount of flats being built, with new residents increasing pressure on recreational activities, I`d like to suggest an increased tax-band or levy for newly built flats which could be ring-fenced for Gunnersbury and help with long-term maintenance rather than the quickly spent one-off section 106 amounts.On a lighter note miss the boating pool activities of pedaloes and rowing boats, much loved by youngsters, which I hope can be re-introduced!

Robert Darke ● 6412d

AdamPut that way, we certainly do agree.

Phil Andrews ● 6412d

Phil,We probably actually agree, but I didn't express myself too well initially.Certainly there are many areas of Brentford that need to be protected and maintained, the water frontage, Gunnersbury & Syon Park, the area around Lateward Road etc.What I find unappealing in every sense is the complete mish-mash of building that goes almost the entire length of Brentford High Street on both sides, from the new Music Museum right down to London Road.  Driving or walking down the A315 the surroundings 'jump around', there's no real pattern or trend, so I think the buildings fail to convey any kind of visual character, and that impression detracts from the community spirit.

Adam Beamish ● 6413d

AdamWith due respect, I don't agree.There is much about the character of Brentford and the surrounding area (including Gunnersbury Park) that needs to be protected and maintained.One can replace buildings, one cannot replace the spirit of a community once it is gone.Brentford needs regeneration, but not at the expense of its unique and historic identity.

Phil Andrews ● 6413d

Transforming it ?! - my personal view is if the bulldozers moved in tomorrow and flattened all of Brentford and started again it would be better than what we have now !

Adam Beamish ● 6414d

"some development would seem inevitable"This is the same inevitability which is transforming Brentford into an appallingly overcrowded, overdeveloped urban jungle, eventually totally indistinguishable from any other part of the outer London urban mishmash.Mick

Mick Brent ● 6414d

Are you offering any alternatives for meeting the £10mn funding gap that the park currently has? One way of improving the financial system would be to give leaseholds to organisations who could add to the park e.g. someone who could manage the buildings as an events venue, an upgraded cafe or a riding school to take over the disused stable. However this isn't going to cover the full amount so some development would seem inevitable. Talking about 'a sea of concrete' is not helpful.

Mike Hardacre ● 6414d

"If the 'scare stories' fail to become a reality it is because most likely to be because people like Bela, from across the political spectrum, have managed to put a spotlight on the issue."All right then, I am the Messiah!"

Phil Andrews ● 6415d

JustinI don't have any enemies, not of my own choosing anyway.  Life's too short.

Phil Andrews ● 6415d

Cllr Andrews,Justin is absolutely right. I first started the campaign to overturn the secrecy of the Regeneration Board on the 7 May. Ann Keen was contacted in August because she is our local MP, not because she is Labour. The LibDems also joined us in August.Bela Cunha

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6415d

Sorry Phil but it was you who introduced a party political element into this discussion by the following comment:"who am I to argue with such a politically impartial individual as Bela"I think by saying that Ann Keen 'brought this issue into the public domain' you are showing that you are not really up to speed on what has been happening. Bela and others were raising this matter well before the MP got involved. Sadly by getting the support of Ann Keen she seems to have made an enemy of you.Nobody who genuinely cares for the park wants this to become party political. If the 'scare stories' fail to become a reality it is because most likely to be because people like Bela, from across the political spectrum, have managed to put a spotlight on the issue. As there is yet no categorical statement that the park will not be built on so her work does not yet appear to be done.

Justin Harris ● 6415d

Victor/JustinPlease allow me to try to respond to both of you with this one post.My view of Gunnersbury Park, or any substantial open space for that matter, is that it is an amenity owned by the public for the enjoyment of the public and under no circumstances should its use be negatively impacted or curtailed in the pursuance of private interests or for profit.  Nevertheless I do recognise that when an amenity has been negleted to the point that there are no means available to restore it to its proper condition, other means of bringing in funds should in some circumstances be explored in preference to allowing further deterioration leading to eventual closure.  The caveat here, of course, has to be that whatever end result is agreed upon (after, and in response to, extensive consultation) must represent a clear improvement, from the public's perspective rather than that of any partner or other agency, upon the previous situation.Thus it could be said that I have no dogmatic interest in the public/private debate, but my concern ultimate is with the interests of the public.Doubtless somebody will now accuse me of having been ambiguous on the matter.As this matter was brought into the public domain by a grinning Ann Keen accompanied by an entourage of local press photographers, I think it is rather rich for anybody to accuse me of trying to turn it into a party political issue and well below the standard of integrity that one would usually expect of you Justin.In the final analysis the proof of the pudding will be in the eating.  But when the scare stories have failed to become reality, don't anybody be expecting an apology from these people because it just won't happen.

Phil Andrews ● 6415d

Justin,I was only warned yesterday that I was being spoken of without my knowledge or chance to tell the truth on this site. So thank you for putting the matter straight on what I spent nearly six months of my life doing recently: getting access to the minutes of the secret meetings of the Regeneration Board and, finally, succeeding in getting the meetings opened to the public. It has nothing to do with politics; it is called democracy, the law and transparency.Bela Cunha

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6415d

Cllr Andrews,Please do not tar me with the same brush as Mr Hughes (whoever he is), Ann Keen or anyone else for that matter. Anyone who wants to fight for the preservation of the integrity of Gunnersbury Park is welcome by our group - we don't stop to ask what their political party is. We have had lots of support from LibDems and I have no doubt some of our members are Conservatives too.As to Adrian Lee's assurances. It's not my policy to reveal the contents of others' private correspondence with me. But, to put the matter straight, Cllr Lee chose his words very carefully and what he said was that there were no plans to sell 'freeholds'. Had he been giving a blanket assurance that no land will be sold, there woiuld have been no need for the qualification.Bela Cunha

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6415d

The wording of this is very carefully chosen and is nowhere near to being a commitment not to build on the park. Despite Cllr. Andrew's determination to make this a party political issue the way Bela has thrown the spotlight on the way in which the powers that be have sought to make important decisions without the involvement of the community has the approval of park users across the political spectrum.

Justin Harris ● 6415d

Looking at the register Syon Park and house are rated Grade 1. They both have a higher grade than GP. The park is listed Grade 2* and the nine listed buildings in the park are either Grade II or II*. So I wouldn't see EH raising to many objections if the money went into the park.

Neil Chippendale ● 6415d

Let me stress that I am neither the ward councillor for Gunnersbury Park nor is it within my portfolio area.Now after making this statement What do you think should happen As a councillor you do have more imput than the average person

Victor Mullins ● 6415d

I was talking to the someone connected to the Rothchilds family a few years ago about the convenant, I haven't seen it myself though, but they were saying that from what they understand it would be very easy to break and was not as restrictive as people seem to think it was.An example being the use of the building for arts purposes.Being listed doesn't stop it from being developed. Syon Park and House are listed and English Heritage gave it's blessing to the plan to build the hotel as long as the money went towards the restoration of the house.

Neil Chippendale ● 6415d

BelaWhat political views or affiliations you may or may not hold are of absolutely no concern to me.  Debate is a good thing, I do not begrudge any New Labour member or supporter their opinion or their right to express it, and the views of such people are no more or less valid than my own.As those better acquainted with me than yourself will know, my issue is not about affiliation or political ideology or belief but about basic honesty.  Nothing more.We have heard it suggested in recent debates at Borough Council that the wilful use of untrue allegation and rumour is simply "politics" rather than dishonesty.  I and my colleagues disagree.  Therein lies the essential difference between us. If you follow this forum you will have witnessed many examples of this "politics" that some consider to be a valid and legitimate form of activity for publicly accountable, elected officials who are the beneficiaries of the public's trust to engage in.To cite one of countless instances one Dave Hughes, a regular user of this forum and a close colleague of the Member of Parliament with whom you are working on the Gunnersbury Park campaign, announced some while ago to readers that I planned to use the Management Review of Hounslow Homes, which I was chairing at the time, in order to bring about the privatisation of the local authority's housing stock.  As he is a prominent member of the Labour Party in Hounslow and a former councillor, and as none of his colleagues stepped forward to disassociate themselves from this allegation, it can reasonably be assumed that this particular story was being peddled with the blessing - indeed probably at the behest - of the Party itself.As is usually the case with Mr. Hughes the story was completely without foundation.  From day one of the Review I had made it clear that the only options on the table, in terms of the future management of our housing stock, were either a continuation of Hounslow Homes (the "half-way privatisation" introduced and oddly preferred by New Labour to complete in-house provision, though not so oddly if you understand the set-up) or a reversion to full local authority management.  So it subsequently proved, yet to this day no apology for misleading forum readers has been forthcoming either from Mr. Hughes or the Party.Other similarly wild stories have been disseminated on here through Mr. Hughes.  Then there was the old Conservative deselection saga in the local press, the Hanworth Park leaflets, the press-deadline "Reichstag Fire" during the Isleworth election campaign - the list is endless.But I digress a little, so let us go back to Gunnersbury Park and your own handling of this particular issue.The Lead Member, Councillor Adrian Lee, told you categorically that there were no existing plans to build anything on Gunnersbury Park.He assured you personally that any future proposed developments in the Park would be the subject of full public consultation.He explained to you that he has as deep an affection for Gunnersbury Park as you do, having lived in its vicinity all his life and used it since childhood.Finally, he explained that whilst there were no proposals for the building of a housing estate, he had to realistically investigate the possibility of bringing sums of private and/or Heritage Lottery funds into the Park or else we would risk losing all of the Georgian buildings.You thanked him for his assurances and then brought Ann Keen along to the Park who did a party political press conference and continued circulating the same old lies without any mention whatsoever of your lengthy correspondence on the matter.Can you not understand my point about trust?  Is the story of The Boy Who Cried Wolf entirely lost on you, Mrs. Keen and those others who continue to peddle misinformation about the administration's management of the Park?Let me stress that I am neither the ward councillor for Gunnersbury Park nor is it within my portfolio area.  My intervention in this debate was simply to point out that the stories emanated from a local source with a proud history of deception, misrepresentation and general lack of interest in the truth or otherwise of the stories it peddles.If there are those who, in consideration of all the facts and of the track record of those behind the campaign, still wish to consider it the work of altruistic and concerned individuals like Mrs. Keen with no political axe to grind then that is absolutely their right.  But at least now they are able to do so whilst in full possession of the facts, and as such my role in the discussion is done.

Phil Andrews ● 6415d

Quite - a significant difference - you can sell what you like when it belongs to you - but when it is in trust for the public then you do not have that right, it's the thin end of a very large wedge.

Vanessa Smith ● 6415d

Gunnersbury Park is a listed Park (it's not just the buildings on it that are listed), it is Metropolitan Open Land, in a conservation area, and is also subject to a restrictive Covenant imposed on the land when it was originally sold by the Rothschilds to the councils.Bela Cunha

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6416d

Sometimes Council's have to make tough decisions, I don't see the difference between the Duke selling off part of his land to raise funds to restore Syon and Ealing and Hounslow doing the same to restore the buildings in Gunnersbury.

Neil Chippendale ● 6416d

The proposal to sell 'a significant acreage' of the Park for the construction of 'a small number of large high spec houses' was detailed on Agenda Item 4 of the Board Paper of 10 July 2008 presented to the Gunnersbury Park Regeneration Board. That is what Cllr Edwards calls a false rumourI have fought plans to commercialize Gunnersbury Park for 20 years; which political party is in charge has never been of any interest or concern to me, so Cllr Edwards sarcasm about my political impartiality (how does he presume to know what my political views are or indeed if I have any?) is just a sign of desperation by someone who cannot actually challenge the facts.Bela Cunha

Maria Isabel Cunha ● 6416d

Well there is a slight difference in that the Duke owns that land so basically he can do what he wants planning permission permitting - Gunnersbury Park is another matter.

Vanessa Smith ● 6416d

What would people say if a portion of the park was sold to a hotel chain.The Duke of Northumberland has done this with the proceeds of the sale going to the upkeep of Syon House.

Neil Chippendale ● 6416d

Oce the minutes of the meeting was released I think local's were right to raise the issue. It was just scare tactics. Even if the idea was dismissed it is still a legitamatic topic of conversation as the idea iscon the table.On another point, the buildings in the park have been in decline for years, when I worked in heritage Services at LBH we were calling for cash to be put into the park and very little was done.They need to fastrack a lottery bid.

Neil Chippendale ● 6418d

Fair enough Justin, who am I to argue with such a politically impartial individual as Bela?But I'm surprised you missed the biggest story of the week, that is the proposed closure of all our senior and primary schools.  They will no longer be needed as we intend to sell every child over the age of four into slavery, with all proceeds going to Councillor Thompson's personal retirement fund.The ICG has meekly capitulated on this as we ourselves are closet Conservatives/fascists (delete according to which ward you live and vote in).I know this to be true, Dave Hughes told me.

Phil Andrews ● 6418d

The 'false rumours' were based on the minutes of the joint management board which Bela Cunha had to use a freedom of information request to get. These showed that members of the board which includes Councillors from both Ealing and Hounslow had actively discussed plans to sell off part of the park or the buildings possible for a private school or a luxury residential property development.Her efforts have managed to change the policy of having meetings about the future of the park from which the minutes are not published. We all want debate based on truth and fact which is why people were so unhappy that truth and fact were being kept from the general public.As was said previously all Cllr Thompson has said on this issue is that the public will be consulted on any development of the park. He has not made any commitment that the park will not be built on. If he wanted to end 'false rumours' then all he has to do is rule out selling off any part of the park for development.

Justin Harris ● 6418d

The problem with treating false rumour as though it were fact is that one encourages the purveyors of such misinformation to continue with their scaremongering.  Am I a bit strange, or old-fashioned, for wanting local political debate to be based upon truth and fact?  Is there another false story we can invent, and then debate, for the edification of readers of this forum?Maybe we could award a prize for the most imaginative?

Phil Andrews ● 6418d

Justin Harris wrote: "I'd rather have all of a scruffy but still beautiful park than give bits of it away to developers"I couldn't agree more. To be honest, I'd rather have the park as a complete wilderness area than have parts of it built up with the inevitable office blocks or flat blocks. London's parks are London's lungs - we need them!

Mick Brent ● 6419d

If I concede that the neglect of Gunnersbury Park was going on long before the current administration got into power and the scale of the problem is not their fault is there any chance that this discussion will revert to being about the park rather than local party politics?Peter Thompson's statement currently on the front page promises consultation on the issue but it doesn't guarantee that the park will not be built on. A simple statement on this particular point would undermine any claims that the park was under threat.

Justin Harris ● 6420d

sorry i ment quiet

Gill Hutchison ● 6474d

Now you come to mention it Phil, Dave hughes has been very quite lately

Gill Hutchison ● 6474d

JohnThis inconvenient fact will not deter Ann Keen or her followers from trying to create an issue where none exists.  "You call it dishonesty, we call it politics" - do you remember that rather candid statement at Borough Council during the debate which followed the Hanworth Park by-election (yet another contest in which the Hounslow New Labour strategy proved to be such a resounding success)?Ann Keen is a person completely without shame, we all know that already, but what needs to be remembered is that she would not be in the position she is in today without the consistent support and endorsement of others around her.  Her mentality is simply reflective of that of the group of which she is a member.  One only has to witness the postings on here from certain individuals which ritually either excuse, deny or try to distract attention from her completely unjustifiable expense claims to be aware of the kind of forces that are at work here.What both your party and our group are involved in here, in our own separate ways, is not a political battle but a moral one.  It is this knowledge which serves to drive and inspire us.

Phil Andrews ● 6474d

When I last went to this Park on the day of the Mela I noticed that grass was cut and the efforts of the new contractors was plain to see.I spoke to staff in the Museum who said they liked the new company and that they had a positive approach.I know of no plan to sell off any part of the Park or buildings.There are I believe plans to enhance the use of the sports facilties working with clubs located in the Borough. I again attended a local sports venture in the park some weeks ago with the Deputy Major and other Cllrs.The enthusiam of those groups wanting to use these facilities was reassuring.A park with great potential.An ideal site for musical events like Kenwood or Ealings various music festivals

John Todd ● 6475d

The systematic neglect of public assets is not habitually used as an excuse to sell bits of them off. It is why so many playing fields are being built on. I remember a few years ago walking through the park and regularly seeing four or five games of cricket on at the same time. This time I haven't seen one. Constantly cutting back on ground maintenance has been a massive blow. However, I'd rather have all of a scruffy but still beautiful park than give bits of it away to developers. Generally with all of these types of deals very little of it comes back for investment in the park. Brentford Fountains is probably next on the list.

Justin Harris ● 6475d

It is about time somebody got to grips with running this Country so we do not have to constantly sell off our jewels to fund short-term-gain-projects.

Sarah Felstead ● 6475d

"Well - let's live in the hope that it is just scaremongering, perhaps opening up the joint meetings to the public again would be one way of calming people's fears?"I agree.

Paul Fisher ● 6475d

Well - let's live in the hope that it is just scaremongering, perhaps opening up the joint meetings to the public again would be one way of calming people's fears?

Vanessa Smith ● 6475d

The scaremongering is not limited to the news stand, I have a letter that arrived yesterday from the house of commons advising me about it, and on very high quality paper and tree unfriendly envelope.

Ian Jones ● 6475d

I also noticed that Ann Keen has resurfaced after going to ground for a few weeks hoping her expenses scandal would be forgotten and why the local media entertain this disgrace of an MP these days after she constantly refuses to answer the questions we want answering baffles me.As far as I know,no decisions have been made whatsoever regarding Gunnersbury Park and I believe it was an Ealing Cllr who actually mooted the idea of housing in the park.This is quite simply desparate measures by Ms Keen who not content with now saying that Hounslow should have cut Council Tax and not frozen it for the last two years despite her own party increasing it year on year when in Administration,she now feels that spreading alarm will somehow appeal to the thousands who have deserted her.

Paul Fisher ● 6475d