leyton.org

Well, there’s nothing quite like a media storm to draw attention to the fact that your own MP has a weblog. It seems he’s been accused of calling us all miserable (link to BBC news).

You can read the article here on his weblog – I plan to do so later on. He also has a slick, but rather generic looking Labour-MP website

As a weblogger myself(!), and a constituent with no party affiliations (but plenty of opinions, as Mr Harris himself will have recently discovered after I wrote to him about 42 days detention), I plan to keep a bit more of an eye on his weblog in future. It’s certainly to be commended (especially as he’s a minister), and I certainly hope the current media storm doesn’t put him off maintaining it. If only more politicians would do so (Glasgow councillors in particular), we’d all perhaps know a tiny bit more about what our representatives think.

Further to the Campaign meeting last week, the Save Pollok Park campaign have put together details of what matters should be raised with the council in order to get the plan called-in to Scottish Ministers.

My own letter is here, feel free to use it, but do make it your own. I’ve popped mine in the post today. It needs to be delivered by next monday. Techie though I may be, I prefer where possible to put serious objections on dead trees, especially as I’ve got some nice new (recycled) paper that looks quite nice. If your time is short, you can also e-mail planning.representations@glasgow.gov.uk, but do put the following in the subject heading: APPLICATION TO BE REFERRED TO SCOTTISH MINISTERS 07/03308/DC.

The goal is to raise new matters, and flag items that were not properly dealt with. The campaign site has a few, so choose those that matter to you and include them.

Separately, how about having a constructive think about what could be done to improve the park? The council paints a picture of objectors in the media, and it’d be great if people took on the challenge to make some suggestions, so when the consultation is re-opened, they’ll be frankly taken aback by the ideas to make the park a better place.

The council, in it’s dismissal of the Save Pollok Park campaign – like to suggest its opposition to Go Ape in Pollok Park is a negative, single-issue campaign, devoid of constructive suggestions for how the council could meet it’s goals and targets to improve the use of the park.

So to counter that, I thought it’d be worth putting up my own suggestions to Glasgow council. These are just the results of a mornings thinking (aided, I should add, by a wonderful 14km run this beautiful spring morning through Maxwell, Queens, Bellahouston and Pollok Parks).

Cycle hire

We have a hut in Bellahouston park where you can borrow some putters for the pitch and put facility there. With Pollok park, why not introduce similar for bikes, so that better use can be made of the parks mountain bike circuit? It seems woefully under-used: I don’t recall seeing even one biker on it this year, that I recall. Bikes are obviously a bit more valuable than a putter, so a returnable deposit would probably be necessary, although free-bike schemes do operate in some cities.

Rename Pollokshaws West railway station

Pollokshaws west station really needs to be renamed “Pollok Park”, because it’s, well, extraordinarily convenient for the park – but you wouldn’t know it from the name! The free shuttle bus service operates there. Perhaps then visitors to the city, staying in the city centre, would be more inclined to come and visit if they could look at a train map and immediately know where to go?

It’d make sense on another level too. Even locals (myself included) get confused at times as to which station is which. A recent new member at my running club, a long-term Glasgow resident, understandably got mixed up between:

• Pollokshaws West (for Pollok Park)
• Pollokshaws East (on the Cathcart Circle, and at least a 10 minute walk from the Park)
• Pollokshields West (also on the Cathcart circle, and a full 20 minute walk from the Park!!). This is the most confusing name of all. Pollokshields vs Pollokshaws? Throw in, perhaps, a strong Glasgow accent from the person selling you a ticket, and it’s easy to imagine most people getting confused, and winding up in the wrong place.

So we’d actually solve two problems: Understandable confusion, and making it clear Pollok Park is easy to reach, without using a car. On which note…

Traffic

It’s a bit of a bind that cars dominate the central part of Pollok park, and I’m not entirely sure why it’s necessary that the two car parks need to be joined up. It’d be really rather nice if they could look to pedestrianise (at least during peak times/weekends) the section of road that runs from just by the Burrell, through to the back of Pollok house.

Cars also frequently drive at speed, and often (I feel) without due consideration to other road users. Getting rid of them would make the main paths through Pollok entirely traffic free, and more conducive to walks, running, cyclists and more.

If they also reviewed the traffic lights at park exits (they’re not green for long enough at weekends), they might also prevent accidents as cars race to exit, also ruining the benefits of what was supposed to be a relaxing stroll in the park, for many visitors.

Improving existing spaces and facilities

This sounds fun, doesn’t it? But the fields to the east of the park, at the exit on to Haggs/Shawmoss Road, are very poorly drained, and frequently flooded. So they really need to improve the drainage to enable better use of the field to be made. If there have been efforts to improve drainage into the stream, it’s not really worked.

It’s such a great green space, it seems woefully under used, largely just as an overflow car park, and by occasional golfers. Such an open space could be useful for fairs, fetes, parties, camps, and perhaps even markets.

Similarly, the clay courts by this same exit have not – in all my years visiting and living in Glasgow – ever been used. Other than, it seems, to provide a short-cut for cars/vans judging by the damage to the grass verge. Quite simply, they should either be turned to some other purpose, or they should be approaching local schools and clubs to find out why they’re not playing fields of choice.

More events

There seem to be a few ‘big’ events at Pollok park, and elsewhere, but it’d be good to see more events making use of the parks in a structured, but perhaps smaller way. I’m working on my own suggestion (which I’m hoping to be saying more about later this month, after I’m married), to bring the successful UK Time trial events, to Glasgow.

How about also working in partnership with local groups and organisations that already make use of the parks (my running club, and Jog Scotland, for instance), to enhance it in ways they suggest. I’m sure there are other groups (football clubs, cycling clubs) that’d help.

Anything else?

These thoughts are just my own, from a bit of thinking as I ran, and as I avoid some boring accounts work I should really be getting on with. I’m sure that the people of Glasgow, and the Save Pollok Park campaign, have even more suggestions. It’s important that the council realises that the energy and passion demonstrated by thousands of people here in Glasgow for Pollok Park, and many of our other similarly threatened green spaces, is not seen as hostile, but enthused and passionate about our parks, with ideas and suggestions: If only the council would reach out and listen, rather than running flawed consultation exercises that merely give them the result they want.

So when the council finally sees the error of it’s ways, hopefully they’ll start listening to the park users, and then discover – if they do it properly – that we’re not a bunch of nimby’s (as they’ve accused), but an engaged, passionate, and constructive group of people who would actually like to see better use being made of our parks, without selling it off, and charging people unrealistic amounts for the privilege, in some dressed up attempt to “improve” the park.

Last night both Frances and I attended the campaign meeting against Go Ape in Pollok Park, excellently organised – as ever – by Save Pollok Park. It was good to finally briefly meet Bill Fraser too, having exchanged plenty of e-mails over the last few months!

There’s good coverage of the meeting at the Evening times, and The Herald, both with video segments that do a great job of summarising the event. The BBC has brief coverage, but nothing at all from the Scotsman as far as I can tell. But lots to do before we get that far, and it’s by no means guaranteed.

The meeting was a great success, and some excellent points made by all present (politicians and campaigners), across – I think – all political persuasions. A really encouraging turnout of five MSP’s, and five Glasgow councillors, and I genuinely felt that the politicians were going to be a really useful, and supportive asset as matters move forward. Notably none from Labour – who control Glasgow council, but not the parliament – which says all you need to know really.

It’s clear that simply having thousands of signatures on a petition (sign it here!) isn’t enough, but the ineptitude of the council planners, the woeful exclusion of pertinent pieces of information, the misrepresentation of key organisational views, all make excellent grounds for the ‘calling-in’ by the Scottish Government, and – hopefully – sense to prevail.

For anybody interested, I’ve converted the presentation slides that were used to a (small) PDF or a larger one. The shrunk down Powerpoint is here.

One of my three local councillors, David Meikle, yesterday resigned from the Glasgow Council planning committee. He gave a statement:

Following today’s outrageous decision to approve Go Ape I can no longer sit as a member of the Planning Committee. Go Ape is a fantastic facility but will, in my opinion, have a detrimental impact on the North Wood and the Burrell Collection.

The proposal my fellow councillors approved today is just a step too far and unlike the 14 councillors who approved this scheme I have listened to my constituents, to the people of Glasgow and the Save Pollok Park group, who made a convincing argument against the application at today’s hearing. This is why I have resigned from the Committee.”

I’m in two minds about Councillor Meikle’s decision here. On the one hand, and taken at face value, he appears to have taken a principled stand against a farcical committee decision that is unwanted in a treasured part of Glasgow. So he feels it’s not something he can remain a part of. It certainly has some integrity about it. Whilst I’m yet to see how each of the councillors on the committee voted, it sounds like it was largely down party lines, with all bar one Labour councillor voting to instruction, and a few SNP councillors doing similar for reasons I can’t understand. I have absolutely no confidence the council planning committee takes an objective point of view to what’s put before it, and I don’t think I could be a part of such a body if I were in his position.

On the other hand, and reading between the lines somewhat, it’s a perfect local campaign for a conservative politician to campaign for: let’s keep the park as it is, look how Labour ruined our park, etc. etc. But mostly I’m worried that – on the basis it is a matter of principle – we’ve now gone and lost one of the few committee members who seemed to have had any sense in this matter. So we’re probably in line for a further muppet on the committee, and even worse decisions. Presuming the Labour councillors didn’t always come down on party political lines and gave his minority vote a bit more sway.

This shouldn’t be read as criticism of Cllr Meikle (or be something that puts him off doing what he’s doing, largely, quite well in our ward). He is, after all, one of the very few Glasgow councillors who feels it’s appropriate to put a public record of what he’s up to and thinking (See www.david4pollokshields.com, but feel free to skip the party political stuff; I certainly do).

I certainly wish I could analyse some of the decisions of my other councillors in the same detail, but it’s hard to critique the views and actions of people who stay absolutely silent…

Sad but hardly shocking news that the lemmings at Glasgow council have approved the Go Ape proposal. The BBC covers the story, and gives the final vote as 14 in favour, 6 against. I gather this includes a number of SNP councillors, which shows the ineptitude is not even along party lines.

This clearly demonstrates we have councillors of all political persuasions that treat the electorate with complete and utter contempt. Over 4000 signatures to the petition (which is still available online), and over 800 objection letters, against a few hundred supporting. The number of people objecting outweighed the votes any one of the councillors received at last years election: A strong and compelling mandate, and also gives the lie to the ‘consultation’ that was ineptly organised they can’t even answer Freedom of Information requests about the framework they used.

The Evening Times has more, including an excellent report. One councillor interviewed explained the protesters wouldn’t sway them, as the application must be viewed on its merits. This is one of the problems with the very planning process and the council that people are “just doing their jobs”, and not looking at the wider implications of the proposal and decision, not least that there are thousands of people voicing a strong opinion against. Whether it’s a stand on principle or to enable wider political campaigning on this issue (he had to tread carefully in the run-up to the vote), but Glasgow’s only Conservative councillor resigned from the committee after the vote.

The more I learn about this proposal, the more clear it becomes that the council is intent on just doing what it wants. It’s very much my hope that this issue is kept to the fore in the coming weeks, months and years, and that the voting record of the councillors on this committee are put to them at the next election. They are intent on selling off the assets, and turning one of the biggest urban green spaces in Europe into a theme park. Before too long the trees themselves risk being endangered when the next proposal comes along to turn the North Wood pond into a boating lake…. I was running in Pollok Park earlier today, and yesterday evening, and it was delightful. For how much longer?

Go Ape should be ashamed to call themselves a considerate and environmentally sensitive company. I had been thinking of going and giving the Aberfoyle course a go, but I’m staying well clear of this company at least until they see the error of their ways.

Update

• G41 have a detailed breakdown of the meeting.
• ‘How they voted’ added below.

How they voted

FOR

• George Redmond, Lab
• Jonathan Findlay, Lab
• Liz Cameron, Lab
• Frank Docherty, Lab
• Alex Glass, Lab
• Jean McFadden, Lab
• Catherine McMaster, Lab
• Shaukat Butt, Lab
• Paul Rooney, Lab
• George Ryan, Lab
• Jim Todd, Lab
• Iris Gibson, SNP
• Jahangir Hanif, SNP
• John McLaughlin, SNP

AGAINST

• Jim McNally, Lab
• Margot Clark, Lib/Dem
• Craig Mackay, SNP
• George Roberts, SNP
• David Meikle, Conservative
• Kieran Wild, Green

At risk of sounding a bit flippant, it’s all starting to get ‘properly serious’ in the Save Pollok Park campaign to prevent Go Ape from setting up in Pollok Park’s North Wood, and thereby ruining the tranquility of one of the few remaining peaceful parts of the park.

In the next week or soNext Tuesday the planning committee are undertaking a site visit, and will later be hearing from concerned parties at the City Chambers. Suffice to say, the Save Pollok campaign are making sure the voices of the concerned public and park users is properly heard, and that there is no doubt where the majority of local opinion falls on this matter.

The detail below is taken from the Save Pollok Park website. Volunteers have also been out in the neighbourhood getting signatures for the petition (sign an online version here if you want: But soon!).

Site Visit & Hearing 25th March

The Planning Applications Committee will hold a site visit and hearing on Tuesday, 25th March. A bus will take members from the City Chambers to Pollok Park, arriving there by 10.00. Accompanied by a Planning Officer they will inspect the site before returning to City Chambers for a hearing scheduled at approx 11.00.

We need volunteers!

We’re sure many of you will want to support us either at the City Chambers or at the Park that day. We need two groups of people to help us out – one at the Burrell, the other George Square.

At the Burrell – we need a group to meet at 09.30 and be available until 1030. Your task is to help mark out the major features of the Go Ape site to help the committee members understand the layout a little better At the City Chambers – once again we need to demonstrate support with as many campaigners as possible at the hearing. You need to be available from 10.30-12.00

Register Your Attendance

We appreciate it’s a Tuesday morning but please do your best to turn up for an hour or two. So we can plan, we need to know how many can make it to either location. We’ve created a special e-mail address where you can register your interest. Please send a mail to: northwoodaction@gmail.com and state: name, e-mail address, and a phone number. Please tell us whether you can be at the Burrell or City Chambers or if you have no preference. Please do this by next Wednesday, 19th March. It’s the Easter weekend just before the hearing so we need time to make final plans and communicate them back to you.

More at http://www.savepollokpark.com in the News and Updates pages.

I’m hoping to get along to the Burrell group, but it depends a little on whether I can squeeze the time in during a busy work day. In the meantime, I figured I’d mentioned this to everybody I know

Is the Go Ape proposal in Pollok park the straw that broke the camels back? Glasgow council need to realise pretty sharply that their behaviour with regards the atrocious “public consultation” has antagonised a lot of people in Glasgow. There was a palpable sense at both the Go Ape meeting, and the recent ‘future of shawlands’ meeting that the council is disregarding the views of the public it is supposed to represent.

Antagonised voters can be organised into an effective campaign, as the Save Pollok Park campaign demonstrates. Just because we’ve been ignored in the past, it does not mean we’re happy to let that continue.

So Glasgow council should probably start sitting up and paying attention, particular the Labour councillors in the council. Whatever the outcome of the Go Ape campaign, a great number of people have come together and co-ordinated their campaigning efforts, and that’s not likely to disappear afterwards. Welcome then Cross Glasgow!, part of the Cross Glasgow alliance.

The Cross Glasgow! weblog is well worth adding to your bookmarks and feeds as it takes shape. Maybe the Glasgow councillors (most of whom don’t appear to have heard of the internet) will start sitting up and paying attention before the next election? If not, they may get a bit of a shock.

I spent an hour or so over in Pollok Park this afternoon attending the Save Pollok Park organised vigil. It was a spectacular success, with organisers counting 1,100 people in attendance. Particularly impressive given it was organised in very little time. Quite clearly an example of how much local opinion is against the proposal. A minutes silence was held to draw attention to the peace and quiet that makes the glade so special. Save for the barking of a few dogs, it was a very nice moment.

As I arrived, I saw that Nicola Sturgeon was in attendance, doing interviews and speaking to the press. I was quitevery surprised that she said hello, and clearly remembered me from our encounters at the Scottish parliamentary elections last year, so I had a brief chat to her, and thanked her for the great work she is doing in giving the campaign Scotland-wide attention. Whilst she wouldn’t be drawn on whether the proposal would be “recalled” to the Scottish Parliament, she certainly suggested it was ‘theoretically possible‘.

Yesterday there was the news in Saturday’s Herald that Go Ape are investigating an alternative site, south of the Burrell. Whilst it’d be a better spot, I’m now quite convinced the park isn’t suitable for anything like this. It’s now much more about a lack of consultation, a disengagement between the people of Glasgow and the council, and ensuring that the few remaining quiet retreats aren’t developed. But perhaps most importantly of all – spending the councilour money on ways to genuinely encourage children to take up activities that won’t cost an absolute fortune. The Go Ape proposal is far more commercial in nature than is appropriate for the park, aimed at the businesses of Glasgow, not the majority of people.

The Vigil should hopefully keep the campaign in the public eye, and make it very clear to the council that they ignore the views of the public at their peril. It’s not that long until the next election, and the Save Pollok park campaign could very easily become an important factor when people are next choosing how to vote.

Update

• The BBC has coverage of the event. They put the numbers at 400, which is a bit of an under-estimate.

Interesting news from the political scene up here in Scotland. First Minister Alex Salmond has threatened to resign if his budget doesn’t pass. On first hearing this I was surprised, but as you look at the detail it’s probably unlikely he’ll need to do so. Brian Taylor explains it better than I can, but the Conservative party will probably support it having won concessions, the Liberals will probably abstain (sigh), and Labour will vote against. So it should pass.

The backdrop to Salmond’s threat is also well explained by Brian Taylor: Salmond is a grand showman, and a big statement like this makes big headlines. Then there’s the fact that his resignation alone won’t lead to a dissolution of parliament, that needs a 2/3 vote or no new First Minister after 28 days. Finally, and most importantly, there are the raw politics that lie behind it all: The SNP have increased their popularity (or, so far at least, not screwed up on anything), so the other parties must be accutely aware that they will need a lot more time to wear down the SNP, before they can expect to do well in an election. From where I’m sitting (fences can actually be comfortable), that’s well over four years away.

So if there was an election tomorrow, I’d almost certainly be voting for another party at the list level: The Liberal Democrats, who got my regional list vote last year, have really failed to impress with their (misguided) attempt at forging a strong and distinct name for themselves in opposition, rather than working more closely with the SNP: They share so many policies with the SNP it feels like a betrayal of their supporters values.

Salmond’s threat may be a gesture, but it’s a good one by a politician who seems on top of his game, with nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Update

So the budget passed, with the Conservatives supporting the SNP’s budget, and almost every other MSP abstaining. Not exactly surprising to hear the threat to resign was roundly criticised. However, I still quite liked the bravado and confidence it showed, and that there was clear compromise between two party’s demonstrates that minority government can work, further showing that all of our votes are all the more valuable with this system.