Showing posts with label Shipley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Shipley. Show all posts

Tuesday, 4 March 2014

Leaving Bradford? Your views please

****

OK, I most of you aren't from (or especially interested in) Bradford but for those who are there's a blog post at the Bingley Rural Conservatives website about whether Shipley, Bingley and Keighley should leave Bradford:

There are undoubtedly differing views about this idea – some feel that replacing rule from Bradford with rule from Keighley isn’t necessarily an improvement while others feel that the dominance of the old City over the wider District leads to misplaced priorities. Phil Davies is very concerned about planning decisions but there must be equal concern about the manner in which Bradford Labour has implemented its cuts to services.

Just recently, during the budget discussions, Labour proposed closing five children’s centres – every one in the Shipley and Keighley constituencies and every one in a ward with Conservative councillors. The same goes for spending on highways, on youth services and on regeneration – the focus is on the City and especially the City centre.

Happy to accept views from anywhere - politeness is, as always, urged on you!

....

Wednesday, 18 July 2012

Making cuts doesn't work like that...

****

Last February I - along with my Conservative colleague on Bradford Council - voted against the budget proposed by the Labour Party (and their little watermelon pals from Shipley). We lost and, amongst other things, the Council agreed to make savings in the provision of public lavatories.

This evening we discussed a report at (Conservative-controlled) Shipley Area Committee on the vexed matter of those public loo savings. We were asked to "approve" the cuts proposed by officers. Which would have been fine if a majority of the committee hadn't voted against having those cuts in the first place.

If Bradford's Labour Party wants to make cuts to services can't they do their own dirty work?

****

At the same meeting, former labour councillor Tony Miller launched into a bizarre criticism of 'snow teams' - a scheme where the council gives some grit and shovels to local folk who want to clear their little bit of road. Tony suggested that it was wrong and people should be paid to clear snow. Only a socialist could find something wrong with the idea of volunteering!

....

Thursday, 23 February 2012

Decision-making, planning and the purposelessness of council strategies

****

Yesterday evening was spent at Shipley Area Committee. Now while this sounds to be in the same category as Vogon poetry, it is quite often an interesting occasion and not just because I’m a masochist.

Last night showed the contrast – and the problems councils have with this – between specific decision-making and the making of plans or strategies. Put simply, we’re pretty good at the former and really rather bad at the latter.

And the meeting allowed me to speak of two great but flawed marketing geniuses...

The first hour and a half of the meeting was taken up with two hotly contested decisions – whether to put speed bumps all over Nab Wood and whether to take the zip wire and bucket swing out from Claremont Fields at Wrose.

In both cases supporters and opponents attended the meeting. As is our practice the chairman allowed each of them some time to express their concerns. In addition to this, time is given to SCAPAG members (representatives of the parishes and neighbourhood forums across the Shipley constituency).

The resulting discussion would, I feel, give a buzz to fans of good local government. Residents were involved, every member of the committee contributed their thoughts and solutions were sought that aimed (if not quite reaching) consensus. People may not like the decisions we took but they couldn’t argue that they weren’t taken with thought and care by councillors.

The remainder of the meeting – another hour – was mostly taken up receiving reports “to note” accompanied by short officer presentations. Two items were linked – headlines from the “state of the district” survey and the Council’s sustainable communities strategy.

Now without going into the details of these things, it struck me that these two reports told a great deal about how the council plans and strategises. Reading through a document littered with words like “overarching”, “transformational priorities” and “journey”, I realised that we haven’t got this process right – or even nearly right.

The problem is that these grand plans simply aren’t working documents. No council officer starts his or her day with getting down the “sustainable community strategy” as a guide to what to do. Nor does any council officer get out our “2020 Vision” to check on our progress.

Published with great fanfares and with exciting talk of partnership, mission and vision, these are little better than glossies produced to give the impression of strategy and planning. Can we take seriously a plan that has nine or ten “transformational priorities”?

Surely, we should have just one priority?

Last night, one Town Councillor (from Denholme as it happens) showed us up by saying in one sentence what priority we should set. It was some along the lines of:

“After years involved in the District, I think we should concentrate on prevention and early intervention.”

A statement of priority and an indication of strategy. That is how business sets priorities, defines strategies and prepares plans. Councils should learn.

....

Wednesday, 13 April 2011

Smells like political interference...

****

There was a meeting of the Shipley Constituency Area Committee - one of Bradford's Area Committees - this evening. Item 10 on the agenda for the meeting was entitled:

Review of decision on gypsy/traveller encampments

The gist of this item was that the resolution of the Committee back in December was contrary to the Council's Constitution. The relevant part of the resolution said:

"That the Chief Executive, in consultation with other Local Authority Chief Officers that he considers appropriate, be requested to press the Government to introduce more robust legislation to deal with the problematic and persistent unauthorised encampments as part of a strategy to manage the needs of travelling communities."

The City Solicitor deems that this resolution is outside the remit of the Committee as it does not have "...the authority to instruct the Chief Executive to lobby the Government to change the law as that would be a policy decision."  According to the City Solicitor the Constitution states that Area Committees can only "contribute to the formulation" of policy.

Unfortunately the City Solicitor wasn't in attendance so could neither explain nor defend her decision. However, it seems to me that the Committee's resolution did not breech the Constitution since is does not "instruct" the Chief Executive, it "requests" an action from that person.

Moreover, since the issues that led to the resolution related directly to a series of events in Bingley - within the Shipley constituency - it seems to me that the Committee was acting well within its remit to:

"Consider and address issues raised through neighbourhood forums, liaison groups, parish and town councils and other community bodies"

Much though I like the City Solicitor, it seems to me that this decision raises two serious concerns:

1. The Committee has been constrained in seeking reasonable actions to address specific issues relating to the Area it serves

2. There was a four month gap between the original resolution and today's date - this seems an excessive time for one individual to consider a given resolution that raises concern

The whole affair smells a funny colour - call me a cynic but I sense political interference.

....

Tuesday, 6 April 2010

Councillor Cooke's draft General Election itinerary

***

I’ve been told there’s an election on and have decided – in the interests of research (and getting them elected) – to spend a little time with various Conservative candidates. Not all are standing for parliament, some are local councillors. Most of this will be after 27th April when I am taking time off work for some gentle campaigning.

The people I’ll be supporting (time, money & travel arrangements allowing) – and who you should all support too are:

Glen Miller. Not just because of his name but because he is a very good local councillor in the Worth Valley* (to those with a literary bent that is the area around Haworth and to train buffs has a well-known steam railway). And one of my best friends!

Phil Davies. Partly because he’s my MP (and I’ll expect his support when I’m up for election) but mostly because he’s proved to be one of those voices of sanity on drinking, smoking and personal liberty. He is also this sites official mascot.

Wakey Tory Boy. Otherwise known as Anthony Calvert. Has the task of campaigning to unseat the odious Ed Balls in Morley & Outwood. ‘Nuff said. (Might also nip over to campaign for Nick Pickles whose standing against Ed’s wife in Normanton, Pontefract & Castleford)

Zahid Iqbal. A truly nice guy who will make an independent-minded MP for Bradford West (and the house needs these – especially ones whom understand the property markets).

Val Townend. Councillor for Baildon ward – incredibly hard-working on behalf of her residents, genuinely cares about the communities she represents and is very, very insistant!

Matt Lobley. Another hard-worker (and Chairman of the organisation that employs me) who will do a great job serving people in Leeds North East – including a fair smattering of my wife’s family

Gordon Henderson. Will be the next MP for Sittingbourne & Sheppey – where better that the Kent marches to be an MP! Won’t be a pussy cat when he gets there – like my MP, Gordon’s a fervent eurosceptic and has a penchant for outspoken bluntness. Also a man with a successful business career and impeccable local roots

Iain Lindley. Rather owe Iain support for his running of the Vote UK forum – although god knows what will happen if he gets elected. All us political anoraks with no forum! A tough fight in Worsley & Eccles South but Iain’s got as good a chance as anyone.

I'm happy to consider supporting others - if you're a Tory and can put up a good case for having me turn up to help, just let me know!

Whatever, I'll be blogging a few thoughts on these campaigns.

*political geek point: Worth Valley Ward was once represented by Eric Pickles and contains the birthplaces of the late Bob Cryer and spinmeister, Alistair Campbell.
...

Sunday, 28 February 2010

Lunch and a thought or two on politics

***

Spent a very pleasant lunchtime celebrating Margaret Eaton’s DBE with the Shipley Constituency Party. I made comment on Margaret’s honour here so won’t revisit except to say how impressed I was by her today. If you want to learn what class really is you could do no better than work with Margaret for a few days.

Two things struck me about the gathering.

Firstly, how old we’re getting. I’ve been active here for about 20 years and it’s the same faces – just all those years older. This shows the problem that all political parties are facing – indeed I had a conversation along these lines with some fellow guests. The parties – once a million or more strong – are now shadows of their former selves, only help together by our longevity and a trickle of new activists.

Secondly, how important places like Bradford are to the Party. And that – as I’ve said before – our strategy in such places might be slightly misplaced. These people want steak and chips not polenta – we need to put a little blood in the water. The voters of Bingley Rural – 60% of whom will vote Tory – are not the cartoon middle-class beloved of the BBC. They are people who go to the pub, smoke, drink more than the BMA says they should and holiday in Torremolinos. They hate Gordon – I know because they tell me they do – but without that red meat, without a real sense that the scrounger state will be capped, they might not bother.

Some of the stuff we hear is good – promises of business friendly tax cuts, sorting out the deficit, scrapping quangos and handing across a little more local control. But the stuff about countline bars, booze prices and sex education is rubbish – just more of the nanny state that we all hate. Bingley Rural voters know smoking’s bad for them, that they shouldn’t drink too much, too often and that chocolate bars can make you fat (as part of a calorie controlled diet) – what they don’t want is the government to ram that in their face all the bloody time.