Leader – Politicians must be prepared to upset drivers
Being green is often easier in theory than in practice.
That is what the council found when it reviewed the various less-than-environmentally-friendly investments made with money from its pension fund.
There was an air of Yes Minister about the atmosphere in Town Hall offices as bureaucrats patiently explained how in a million small and convoluted ways, getting rid of investments in fossil fuel extraction and diverting money into eco-friendly projects was simply impossible.
Likewise, people want to do their bit, but when it comes down to everyday decisions, it’s hard. Many understandably choose the most convenient, cheapest options. Hence why, sometimes, the state must intervene to force or incentivise them to behave in a particular way.
Take motoring. If London’s filthy air is to be cleaned up and lives saved, drivers must be inconvenienced.
Sure, there will be howls of protest, but you can’t please all the people all the time. Controlled parking zones (CPZs) may get people’s goat, but, as suggested by the chaos in Clapton, where an island of free for all parking was left amid a sea of CPZs, blanket controls would be fair.
As for the closure of some roads in Stoke Newington to create a cycle superhighway, we need more of this, not less.
It’s not about bashing motorists; it’s about getting more of them to drive less or not at all – for the good of everyone.
We have improved neighbourhoods for residents by putting in parking controls across 70% of the borough and filtering 118 roads. I can assure you none of it was easy, as you witnessed at the last full council meeting, but bringing about change never is. What makes it harder at times is when the media sensationalise the issues, so thank you for the balanced opinion.”
I now feel even more than before that Clapton was used to make an example of what happens when you dare to vote NO to a CPZ, the wording was designed to confuse, there was plenty of time to sort the area out without causing chaos, but the department Cllr Demirci heads offered up one delaying tactic and delaying “mistake” after another to make sure the quality of life of the local residents suffered,
I don’t have a car but get woken up every morning by the queue of daytime visitors waiting for a parking space to come free. Engines running, CD players blasting, it’s great. By using us as the horses head in a money grab, that actually I don’t have a problem with, services need to be paid for, but the way this has been done is exactly the sort of non sense that has empowered the UKIP and Trumps of this world…probably 400 local Labour votes have now been lost this year at a guess.
Yes but your incompetent implementation and the underhanded way in which you dealt with it, is what gets most people really angry (apart from having nowhere to park). Your excuses for why you implemented it in some roads that didn’t want it (like Thistlewaite) and then your subsequent refusal to explain why, with the recent FOI rejection (you lost the info of who implemented it, or why it was implemented against the consultation results) smacks of either incompetence, corruption or both.
Your lack of any answer as to what the residents are supposed to do when they are faced with nowhere to park. (A situation that you have deliberately caused) is unbearable for most people as you have seen by the overwhelming negative response to your underhanded actions.
Deluding yourself that you have “improved neighbourhoods” with what is basically a massive hike in council tax is almost laughable – how are residents and non residents continuously driving round and round for hours on end improving the environment? Think of the extra pollution levels you have blighted us all with – have you no shame?
But I will congratulate you on getting one message of support amongst the hundreds of negative ones. It seems that’s all you need to introduce CPZ that very few people want or wanted (when it was first introduced in Stoke Newington over 1000 people raised their hands to say No they didn’t want it. So your undemocratic council brought it in for the 5 people that did and it spread like a cancer as your council knew it would.
If you had one iota of decency, then you would use the massive amounts of money you will be generating from your obnoxious scheme, to pay for our streets to be policed instead of zealous parking attendants preying on residents for parking in their own streets.
But our safety is the least of your concerns as it doesn’t generate any more money for your overpaid under performing fifedom.
If you had a shred of humanity, you would not wait until April to sort your mess out and sort it out immediately.
“Improved neighbourhoods” If you really want to bring about change (for change sake) why don’t you do a consultation on whether the people you are supposed to represent believe such hogwash. Then when you don’t get the answer you are looking for, you could break it down into separate roads or even houses, then flats until you do.
Does that sound familiar?
Thank you for the great article.
What the Council is doing is not about individuals. Not you in your car, or me on my bike, but about creating the best outcomes for everyone in the borough together.
Poor air quality, road danger, bullying and nuisance are major characteristics of cars in cities. Obesity and diabetes are a national epidemic, the great diseases of having too much and doing too little.
Many people live large parts of their lives unwell, disabled and limited by the diseases of sedentary car based lifestyles. Children are not allowed to travel independently or play in public spaces because parents fear danger from motor traffic.
The vast majority of journeys in urban areas are under 5 miles. The majority of these trips could be walked, cycled or made by public transport. London has an unrivalled bus network. Hackney has connected residential streets that are mostly safe and pleasant for cycling and walking.
The city is made up of many town, district and local centres which provide access to many local services without the need to get in a car. Living without a car in London, making use of taxis, car hire, minicabs, car clubs and car sharing when needed, is not just possible, it makes life so much better. Every car not on the road makes the city a little better for everyone. Every extra car makes cities a little worse for everyone including drivers.
The Council needs to take a strong position for the majority of residents who do not own cars. In doing so, by making walking, cycling and public transport more convenient than driving and therefore more likely to be a default choice, benefits will emerge for the entire community.
– Hackney (already London’s most liveable boough by almost any emotional measure) will become a better place to live. Its streets will be less dominated by motor traffic, filling with opportunities to create new spaces for people.
– Cycling will become safer and more enjoyable. Cycling offers exactly the same local door to door journeys as driving; it is also more sociable and each journey is different and fun
– Filtered permeability means making active, healthy travel more convenient than driving. It reduces rat running without increasing traffic on main roads. Where traffic moves to other residential streets this can be stemmed by further filtering. Any estate agent will tell you that safe, quiet residential streets are highly desirable places to live.
Dutch children are the happiest in the ‘rich’ world, according go Unicef. This is largely attributed to the fact that they cycle to school, getting proper quality time with their parents amd other children in public space. The Dutch regard driving kids to school as anti-social, like smoking. Other factors play a part too, of course, including a better approach to education. British children, by contrast, are sat in front of the tv and stuffed into cars, completely against what they actually want.
Copenhagen is the world’s most liveable city according to Monocle Magazine. In other rankings, other cities top the league table. But what all have in common is investment in making cities for people. Copenhagen was once overrun by cars. Every tiny street was rammed with the stupid things just like London today. It was unpleasant, poor and downtrodden. Over a period of 50 years the city has transformed. Starting with Stroget (the main shopping street), the city centre pedestrianised. Cycle tracks radiated from the centre into the suburbs. Local shopping parades regenerated and bloomed. A key plank of this, fought tooth and nail by motorists and traders, was progressive restriction of car traffic, through high parking charges and street design specifically aimed at making car use an occasional option, not the default. Now, people demand more of the good stuff.
Copenhagen and the Netherlands still have way too much motor traffic and too many big roads. But visiting these awesome places is an absolute treat. They are truly uplifting and inspiring and really show what can be done when strong, doggedly determined leadership is put in place to deliver benefits for everyone.
Bringing these things to Hackney is right for the borough and for London. There is a need to build an ever better place for everyone that accommodates a fast-growing population, and this will mean doing things in the face of often fierce and loud minority opposition. The Council is charged delivering the greater good, which it is doing and has been doing in accordance with its published policies for a long time.
only one third of hackney households have access to a car – but the roads pavements and air belong to all of us
enough of the minority of car owners demanding the right to 100% of public space and to poison our lungs
well done Hackney Council and well said Hackney Gazette
‘the closure of some roads in Stoke Newington to create a cycle superhighway…
‘CPZs and cycle superhighways infuriate some motorists but cleaning up the air is for the good of everyone’ .
Good for everyone? The pollution gets worse if you already live in a high pollution area like a main road If they divert even more cars there.
I have no idea where you get your stats from or whether they are true (If they come from Hackney council then they are probably at the least misleading).
If you don’t have access to a car, you do have the pavements to walk on, or the roads to cycle on, or the parks and marshes to walk in which you don’t pay any more than your council tax for. Car drivers already pay far more tax than you, in VAT on cars, in road tax, car tax, fuel tax and let’s not forget CPZ. Some of us including Shamus Adams head of Hackney’s CPZ (who drives a huge gas guzzling mercedes) have no choice but to use our cars for our work. Unlike Mr Adams we are not subsidized for these costs by the tax payer and we are not given pay rises by our employers each time the council wants to gather more revenue.
If the council were really interested in cleaning up our environment, it would issue CPZ all over Hackney instead it leaves little pockets of non cpz by it’s hineous policy of divide and conquer which increases pollution, carbon footprints and stress levels for all who live in these areas. It is designed to do just that so that the residents finally have no choice but to say “yes” even if they don’t want it or simply can’t afford it, (whilst paying one of the highest council taxes in the country already).
It could also get some of it’s incompetent department heads to set an example and cycle into work themselves.
I don’t think any Dutch person would be very happy if they had to pay the extortionate council tax that this borough charges. Neither would they be happy with the cretinous and underhanded way in which the council brings about CPZ. The little pocket that they have left, if asked, would now mostly all want the CPZ (not by choice but by necessity which is the councils ultimate plan) but the council to spite these people for saying no, is making them wait till April. That’s a long time in terms of Stress levels, polution levels etc – no wonder we are so unhappy – perhaps we should get the Dutch to come and run Hackney council they would certainly be cheaper, more efficient and hopefully more honest!
Steve Lane
If you are going to fill the Hackney Citizen comments section with these rants about the council, at least get your facts right (or are they ‘alternative facts’?). Hackney does not have one of the highest council taxes in the country, it is below both the London and national average.
I agree with you that Hackney should role out CPZs across the borough and have long argued that with them. But they do have to conform to the law which insists on consultations so we’re stuck with that process. If people like you were to stop this pointless opposition to CPZs then maybe residents such as those in Millfields wouldn’t be suffering, They would probably have voted Yes.
The fact is that nobody wants to be in uncontrolled streets next to CPZs. The CPZs aren’t going to go away so all logic says you should be in favour to avoid more of the displacement nightmare you now find yourself in. The council is not allowed to actively promote CPZs so we need to explain the dangers of voting No, which is what we have been trying to do in Upper Clapton.
Roll on the expanded ULEZ ….. something else for you to opposes as a ‘money making scheme’.
I guess using too many Capital Letters, calling other human beings incompetent, and describing the way they do their jobs as cretinous and underhanded is going to win you plenty of friends. Never mind.
In answer to your points:
I expect you would find that the Dutch and more certainly the Danes pay more tax as a proportion of income than we do, in return for first class services that everyone wants and values, and that parking charges are set high to dissuade them from driving, since it is understood that promoting and prioritising active travel is a spend to save policy. There is a ‘deal’ done. Dutch drivers doing long distances get good roads in return for acceptance that short car journeys are actively discouraged, with people being prioritised over motors in towns and villages. I accept that the situation is different in the UK since we don’t happen to want to carve up our countryside for big roads and we killed the damaging plans for big motorway ‘boxes’ in London in the 1970s.
But this is London and I give myself, a car free individual, as an example.
I do demand that those who want to occupy communal, high value, public space with their property should rent it from everyone else who owns it. It’s our space too. I am privileged not to own a car, and I don’t store my things in public spaces. Yet I have to negotiate my way past the four wheeled objects, other people’s property stored in the public realm that take up space outside my house and streets beyond, free of charge (I don’t live in a CPZ). These objects fill up and sterilise the space, preventing its use for anything other than parking and moving motor vehicles. Opportunities lost.
So what to do? Perhaps I could rent a space. To put a plant box there, maybe grow herbs that people on the street can use for their cooking. Or maybe put a bike shed in my space. Yes I would be happy to pay for the use of that space, to rent it from the rest of the community, if indeed I needed it, and this would be fair, I think. As it happens, cyclists using the new green shelters also pay an annual fee. In return the shelters are maintained and kept in good condition. That also seems fair to me.
At a time when local authorities are being starved of funds, and given that the council tax you complain of only pays a quarter of the total costs of running all the services the council provides, why shouldn’t the Council charge for your use of public land on everyone’s behalf, so that it can continue to provide the high quality services people demand?
Here here.
Steve J
If you are going to have a rant yourself -get your facts right before ranting – we are pushing for the council to bring CPZ here! Have you got that?
Or do you need an interpreter?
Even though it is quite rightly despised by many. They have brought chaos to our streets and we have no choice to accept it. But they/you are making us wait. They/you have selectively used the consultations Ignoring some results whilst honouring others.
As for me ranting – These are facts:- If you’d had your home and environment destroyed by corrupt hackney planning officers, your kids given no school place, Senior officers in the council running libelous fabricated smear campaigns against you for revealing their corruption. You might be ranting too!
Your comments on millfields are as confusing as the rest of your outdated misleading info, as Millfields is already blessed with CPZ. Your comments on council tax are also misleading as if you add all the things like the mayor of london Non existent Police etc a typical band D bill comes to £1800 and more which is more than the highest (Weymouth & Portland).
No doubt your kind will benefit from the monies made from the expanded ULez but hopefully I’ll be long gone, I’ve had enough of living with criminals abusing me and their office from Shirley Oaks in Lambeth (at least Lambeth is honest enough to come clean on it’s dishonest affairs/failures) to this rotten borough run by criminals – you are all the same to me. Self interested money grabbing do gooders pretending to be concerned for the environment and using it to squeeze every last drop from its citizens whilst lining its own pockets – just because you can.
Lastly if your going to make snidey and rude comments about others who have different opinions to your own self righteous delusions. At least have the backbone to put your full name instead of Trolling!
The Danes pay more and get more – I get nothing much at all from hackney council although they did destroy my previous home or in their own words.
“…would adversely affect light and outlook to the rear of these properties to an unacceptable degree, reducing the quality of life of these residents”
or “The perception of being severely overlooked would be very intrusive and harmful to the amenities of those residents”
Then “mislay” the above and proceed with the development allowing it to exceed and breach all planning laws.
Then award the architect/developers £4000 of taxpayers money for their “environmentally Friendly” design. (omitting the damage they had detailed it would cause).
Then run a libelous fabricated smear campaign against me for exposing their corruption.
If they did this to you (or any of you do-gooders writing in their defense) perhaps you’d be describing them in that way too.
The last time I got a wheel clamp in Holland it cost around £20 to remove it, food was cheaper, living was cheaper and I expect taxes were cheaper.
Calling others incompetent, cretinous or underhanded when I have absolute proof that they are, is not a problem for me (I have done worse and the council will not come after me, because they know any honest judge would ask about their criminal acts some of which are mentioned above). Spotting typos such as miss typed capitals is well, simply banal. I’m not looking to make friends, especially from the corrupted organisation that calls itself Hackney Council or from do-gooders that don’t know what they are talking about (see stevej).
Hackney Band D council tax for 2016/17 is £1,294.42, including all GLA/social care precepts. Fact.
I’m band E personally and it’s £1,582.07 if you add to this £200 or so (when the council gets it’s vindictive sloth like act into gear) for parking in the streets that we already pay for £1,782.07 and let’s not forget the conservatives bid to help JAMs by allowing councils to raise council tax by 6% over the next two years, it will be over £1,800 for having ones house destroyed, having no school place for ones children (along with 349 other 11 year olds), having a council wide fabricated smear campaign run against you for whistle-blowing unresolved corruption in that council, having to pay for a car, it’s insurance, it’s mot which I can no longer use, having pollution levels raised at least threefold in my neighbourhood, having a council that doesn’t listen to the concerns of it’s residents and oh having the bins emptied whereby the bin lids are just left anywhere. Great service for the money! Although i’d rather do it myself and save all that money as I know from first hand facts, that some of it is being used to pay the very officers who are criminals and abusing their office within your inherently corrupt organisation.
When you get used to squandering the extra money from CPZ and as history shows, you still want more – what’s next? will you be charging us to breath in and out? Or how many eyes we have?
All of the things you cover were once paid for by rates now you receive at least 10 fold more with council tax and don’t have enough to even run an honest council. What an earth are you doing with all that extra cash? It beggars belief!
How is parking in your street 100% of public space? If that were true we’d be parking on the pavements or in the parks and green spaces which we are not.
We park in the streets and drive on the roads and for that we pay ROAD tax although clearly it is not used for the roads. We pay VAT on (new) cars. We pay fuel tax and we pay tax on our insurance. Most modern cars do not contribute much to the pollution thats going on right now (they are checked every year for this). It is more down to Lorries, buses, planes, crop spraying and large corporates spewing their waste.
If it were down to you, we’d all be riding horses and then you’d be moaning about the air smelling of excrement (rather like in a full council meeting).