 |
| SHOT ACROSS BOWS |
Some years ago Danny Boys Moylan was determined on a plan to destroy Sloane Square.
It was Thompson's threat against sitting councillors that led Pooter Cockell to back off at speed.
Ironically, at that time, it was the redoubtable Victoria Borwick and Tim Coleridge who stood shoulder to shoulder with residents.
It's a shame Cllr Coleridge doesn't repeat his fine gesture today.
Dear Chelsea Councillors,Council position on Crossrail 2 station in ChelseaI have read the RBKC Report and Appendix B to be sent to Tfl regarding Crossrail and I think you should reflect on the fact that you have put yourself on the wrong side of Chelsea residents.The proposals for a Crossrail station have not drawn any strong support. While there are some individual supporters, there has been no public campaign in favour of the station. The Council has been left to argue the case in favour, whereas the usual pattern would have been for Councillors to listen to the arguments put from both sides.This has resulted in a “Council versus the Residents” debate, with the Council seen as closely linked to Tfl rather than listening to residents and small businesses. Tfl have admitted that their consultation effectively asks residents to approve a project when many of the important details are not known, because they are championing an entire railway, and the proposed station has not been evaluated individually and subjected to a cost/benefits analysis.A further problem is that the Council, in taking the lead in arguing against the “No to Crossrail” residents’ group, continues to accuse them of exaggeration, despite them having obtained many details under Freedom of Information requests which were news to residents, and were valid contributions to the debate. Your report, which talks of public support for the station in earlier consultations, makes no mention of the sudden change of plan in 2014, which resulted in many Cremorne residents voting tactically in favour of the Fire Station site while many residents close to that site imagined that the station would not be placed there and did not bother to vote. The last minute change caused much bad feeling.Report A says at point 36. It is important that no-one prejudge the outcome of the consultation, and also that it not be treated as a referendum. The quality of the arguments made should be paramount. This Council will be reading the results of this consultation very carefully.In fact, the consultation question is as follows: Do you have any comments about the proposals for a Crossrail 2 station at King’s Road Chelsea? Therefore, a comment could be “I am in favour” or “I am against” and there is no need to write an essay about the quality of the arguments. A simple statement should be accepted as a matter of democratic principle. Such simple statements were accepted in the previous consultations, upon which you rely in your own report, and to ask for more would be to adopt a double standard.Under representative democracy, elected Councillors can take a stand against the wishes of their constituents, if they believe the issue to be in their constituents’ long term interests. A majority of Chelsea residents think that a Crossrail station, even leaving aside the disruption of construction, will not be in the long term interests of Chelsea.If you are going to commit yourself to taking a stand against your constituents on the “we know best” principle, rather than reserving judgment until the consultation is completed, that will be tested in subsequent elections.James Thompson, Chairman, KRACR
As usual James Thomson has his finger on the pulse.
ReplyDeleteThe Council has decided what it wants to do and is using the consultation process to tell residents what it has decided.
An abomination that needs to be stopped.
Every single Tory councillor needs a firecracker up their backside.
Yes please!
DeleteThis another of those barmy exercises championed by ridiculous councillor Mary Weale. "We agreed to listen but not to hear".
ReplyDeleteWhat a totally stupid and useless member of the human race.
It is not often that a busy resident takes time to write a long and considered letter to councillors about development matters. The Chairman of the Planning Committee, the Cabinet Member for Planning and the Leader should consider the contents carefully and make a considered reply.
ReplyDeleteJames Thomson makes a plea for simplicity in the consultation process. "I am in favour" or "I am against" is the essence of the matter.
ReplyDeleteIt is ridiculous for Officers to ask residents to write essays. And a dereliction of duty for Councillors to support Officers in their job creation exercise.
KISS is the essence. Keep It Simple Stupid. Residents will feel involved, understand what is going on, feel that we have been listened to, and even accept decisions that go against us. PROVIDED that we believe that a fair and open process has taken place and the majority view has been found
I totally agree with Dr JT and all the comments so far. At the same time if the council, and especially TfL, are going to pay more heed to the quality of responses as well as the quantity, there can be no harm in adding to the simple "I oppose.." statement a few saying why I oppose. Such as:
ReplyDelete1- Destruction of the unique character of Chelsea
2- No need for a station as Chelsea is already well served by public transport
3- Breathtaking waste of public money
4- Will destroy local businesses and ruin the environment for residents during the construction phase.
5- Will slow down journey times for the great majority of C2 users travelling to and from SW and NE London.
Or whatever other reason you may have.
I'll say it again -
ReplyDeleteAs I was once told
CONSULTATION IS NOT NEGOTIATION
WHEN DOES CONSULTATION BECOME NOTIFICATION.
DeleteThreats of candidacy against sitting councillors wont worry 1A Not on My Manor Street much, especially as it was tried by the Sutton Development gentlemen.
ReplyDeleteWhat will scare them is a large scale assault on sitting councillors, backed by a concerted organised campaign; and that needs time, money and planning.
The time for threats is over.
The time for organising is now.