Friday, December 05, 2014

A Magic Roundabout

And so it came to pass that the Redbridge Neighbourhoods and Communities Service Committee approved the Officers report that no further action should be taken to extend the U-Turn ban in Clayhall Avenue.

Verily I say unto thee that this decision will pass through the eye of Redbridge Cabinet on the third day of next week without the flutter of an eyelash, whereupon the Bobba Cole requisition will cause a great storm to engulf Full Council on the fifteenth day of the new election year.

For it is written that since the year of our Coalition, our elected representatives here in the province of Redbridge have been in battle with the budget devil of austerity and have made sacrifices on the altar of efficiency while also scouring the corridors, nooks and crannies of the Town Hall to eliminate the evil curse of waste.

Meanwhile, the matter of 10 yards and a few seconds has somehow managed to gain the blessing of exemption from this process by those responsible for it and is set to continue to consume vast amounts of council resources and Officers time while competing protagonists wrangle and plot their next procedural move.

And lo, the Angel of the Oak, never one to miss a trick, appears through the morning mist on a cold winters day for a photo shoot to launch his Holy Grail petition for a roundabout, which local residents have been suggesting for at least the previous 10 years, having invited Barkingside 21 as an afterthought the night before and having completely forgotten the chief Monk’s words of wisdom about everybody working together for a common cause.

l-r Flappy, Mr Rusty, Brian, Basil, Zebedee, Ermintrude
The non-party political, Barkingside 21, petition is located here. Please sign it.


  1. Thanks for a neutral petition. This is a non political issue and none of the Cllrs involved, and who have been fighting for something to be done for many years, have been part of this obviously one party attitude. We will continue to.fight for ALL OF OUR residents . Trying to score cheap political points is not what residents want and deserve. What is required is a solution to this problem, one that is safe for all.

  2. must say i thought wes streeting should be called wes -fleeting_ as his time with you is rather this...seems as if he cannot wait to get away...

  3. Hi Hazel, the petition we've been collecting signatures for all weekend isn't party political and doesn't attack any Conservative politicians, so I'm a bit surprised by this. I was out collecting signatures on the Hill Farm estate this weekend and when people remarked that they were pleased with the decision on the enforcement of U-turns I made a point of saying they should thank their two Lib Dem councillors. Hardly scoring points (and if I was, it was points for Ian and Gwyneth!). Of course, there will be lots of other residents who are disappointed by the decision, but we did a public consultation and we listened to the responses.

    I have an online petition on my website, because it has an online petition facility and enables me to let signatories know about roundabout campaign developments and activities. The more involved the merrier. As you say, people have been calling for this for years, but we've yet to get a result. Jas Athwal recently raised this with Peter Hendy, the CEO of TfL and I recently met with the government relations team there to follow up.

    Jean, of all the criticisms I've ever come across, one of them isn't unwillingness to spend time talking to and listening to people. If ever I do dash off at the end of a meeting, it's usually to another meeting or event. I put my telephone number and e-mail address on all of my out cards and am always glad to come across people who want to talk to a local councillor, whether they vote for me or not. Do feel free to ring in the week.

    1. Wes,
      It is quite simple. By hosting a “non-Party Political petition” on your own Party Political campaign website you have made it difficult for non party organisations such as Barkingside 21, not to mention others of a different political persuasion like Ian and Gwyneth, to link to the petition without appearing to support or endorse your campaign or at the very least drive traffic to it.
      Note also that the link to your site that was on the WWGuardian report has now been removed and quite rightly so.
      All of the ePetition hosting sites I tested (5) before picking one offered the facility to let signatories know of developments. No excuse.

    2. Wes the point is that you did not ask for any of the cllrs to participate in an issue which they had been involved in. In fact as one of the Cllrs for clayhall lives about 2minutes away from.where you had your photograph taken if you had wanted a cross party petition it wouldn't have taken much to contact him. Regarding public consultation and listening, the residents of clayhall and fullwell thought that as it had been confirmed by 2 area committees where officers reports had been submitted there was no necessity to do anything else. The officers new recommendations have now been presented with a recommendation not to go ahead with the 2nd u turn ban which will obviously suit those who objected, whilst doing nothing for those most affected by the traffic. What will you be saying to residents in Fullwell and Clayhall when you canvass there? We need something done to alleviate the problem for all concerned and the Barkingside 21 petition which is non political is in my view the best way to go.

    3. Think you've misunderstood my point, Alan. I haven't got a problem at all with B21 putting up another online petition. We're using the same wording and it all counts towards the same goal. As you know from the paper version - I deliberately didn't put Labour logos of 'Wes for Ilford North' logos and stuff on it.

      I didn't realise you could do that with third party petition sites. Will use those in future.

      In the meantime, Clayhall Tory councillors carping are very welcome to join me collecting signatures.

    4. Would someone kindly explain, PLEASE, why this U-turn ban which was suggested, promoted and agreed very recently, and as I understood it, unanimously by all political parties, has now been unceremoniously dumped. I believe one of the objectors has stated that no accidents have yet occurred at the site as a result of the actions of U-turning drivers. Does this mean someone has to die before any action is taken? Stupid question really - the answer is yes of course.