The Bristol Blogger

Household fuel bills to rise 40%; food up 5-15% depending on who you believe; mortgage interest payments rising by the month; 10% tax rate gone; petrol prices way up. The list goes on …

Meanwhile at Bristol City Council - a Labour administration, remember, whose boss Gordon Brown promised “to listen” - Chief Executive’s pay is up 20%!!! chief officers’ pay is up 10%!!! And the Leader’s pay is up 100%!!!

So how is this all being paid for? Through increased taxation on us of course. Specifically we’re soon going to have to pay for our rubbish to be collected (Blogger Passim) and to park (or not) outside of our own houses. And in the not too distant future look out for that grandaddy of local government revenue raising scams - the CONgestion charge.

But don’t worry because, we’re assured, all these things will only be introduced after meaningful CONsultation with us. Indeed, someone who used to live in London has kindly written to yesterday’s Cancer to tell us how this CONsultation will work:

Having received the recent council literature about the proposal to introduce residents’ parking in Bristol, I would like to ask that when people fill out their consultation forms to consider this: in London, years ago, we had a similar survey and most people I spoke to were against it, but were concerned about the knock-on effect of streets nearby which did adopt the scheme.

As a result, people said no to the scheme, but yes to the scheme if neighbouring streets did it. That means it only took one street to vote in favour for the whole of London to eventually adopt the scheme. My street was in an area away from any local amenities and parking was tight but manageable, a bit like Bristol today. Residents’ parking was brought in and the result was that friends visiting from outside the area were less likely to stop by, delivery vans were frustrated by the need to pay, which often led to a game of “cat and mouse” with the wardens, and yes, there were parking spaces, but it became complete misery for everyone involved.

In addition although we all paid to park in our zone, the zones were so small that you had to pay again if you wanted to drive to the shops, less than seven streets away.

As with all things, this becomes a tax on the poor, as every house can only receive one permit at a cost of £40, so if you are renting a property and sharing with two or more, the second permit would cost £80 and the third a whopping £500. Is this fair?

It is interesting to see how parking problems arise.

In the last few years there have been a large number of properties that have been granted planning to convert into flats, which is of course fine, as there is a housing shortage, but why should the rest of us pay for a problem created by developers and the planning office?

Conversely, can I suggest that as petrol prices rise and with the advent of the new cycle scheme, that before we rush headlong into enormous costs for all, we wait and see whether we really need to go down this route.

The only real winner is the council, which earns a fortune from charges, parking meters and fines, and definitely not you and me.

Zoe Mack, Southville, Bristol.

“Bristol City Council still plans to introduce “pay-as-you-throw” rubbish collections - and residents could end up having to buy bags for their waste,” thunders today’s Evening Cancer.

Who’d've thunk it?

Er, anyone who read The Bristol Blogger nine months ago for starters!

In recognition of this, The Bristol Blogger - in a little recycling initiative of our own - will spend the time between now and next February reprinting all its own stories all over again and call it news.

Save Grove Wood - Act Now!

A large workmen’s hut was erected on 30th May 2008 in Grove Wood. We understand from Bristol City Council that the erection of buildings in Grove Wood contravenes this Conservation Area and that the landowner is fully aware of this restriction.

We are concerned that this could be the prelude to further infringements of this protected area - the loss of more trees and the destruction of wildlife habitat. We have posted up a notice on site to inform anyone that may be about to undertake any work that their actions will be recorded and we will provide witness statements to achieve a prosecution.

We are urging all local people to keep a close eye on Grove Wood and ensure that any activities are recorded. Anything you see could be usefully posted to the blog to build up a record of activities.

To object to the planning proposal to fell the trees, visit the council website:
http://e2eweb.bristol.gov.uk:80/PublicAccess/tdc/DcApplication/application_detailview.aspx?caseno=K0TDLPDN0P400

Indymedia, “Defend Snuff Mills” - read more:
The area of Snuff Mills starting from the Mill up to the first bridge is currently under attack from aggressive ‘woodland management’.
http://bristol.indymedia.org/article/newswir

In case you missed it - which is highly likely as the only place it’s advertised is buried in a PDF document in an obscure corner of the city council’s website - there’s currently an “ongoing” public consultation for the West of England Partnership’s TiF (Transportation Innovation Fund) bid.

This is the council’s idea of letting you have your say on their BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) proposals, including the Bristol and Bath Railway Path plans (Blogger Passim), and on congestion charging.

If you have an opinion call 0800 0193235 between 9.00am and 5.30pm Monday - Friday.

Wonder why they’re not promoting this to the public at all themselves? No doubt there’s a simple explanation …

Bristol Indymedia is pleased to announce the launch of our Indycycle service.

Indycycle is a way of people re-cycling things they no longer need to people who may have a use for it. It is similar to the ideas of Freecycle.

For example, if you have an old bike you don’t need, rather than throw it out to landfill why not offer it to somebody else who may need it?

Indycycle is a great way of for us to consume less resources, stop things going to landfill and build stronger communities.

The system is based on the ideas of the freecycle movement. However we don’t aim to replace freecycle, but instead use our website to build on the idea and make it even easier to pass your items on.

All items must be offered for free – no exchanges or cash are allowed. The person offering the item gets to clear space without needing to make a journey to the tip while the person taking the item gets something they need for free.

Indycycle allows you to post about an item you don’t want (or are looking for) to the site along with a description, photo of the item and your postcode. This means users can search for and see items they may want but also how far they need to travel to pick it up.

A Bristol Indymedia volunteer said, “We are really excited about the addition to what Indymedia does. We hope it will further build on the many green projects, campaigns and initiatives in the region. We see this project as a natural evolution of what Indymedia does – trying to connect people using democratic forms of media.”

To use the Indycycle system please go to:
http://bristol.indymedia.org/indycycle/index.php

Charlie Bolton writes in the comments:

Hi everyone

I have seen Paul Smith suggest in a couple of places that we pursue the idea of setting up a trust to take ownership/control of the path.

(I believe this was the basic idea of John Grimshaw)

Do others see this as an avenue worth pursuing?

By Chris Hutt from the Comments

It all started so well, with Charlie Bolton’s original motion getting beefed up by a Lib-Dem amendment which he accepted. Railway Path supporters cheered and clapped. It looked for a few moments like we were finally laying the ghoul of BRT to rest.

But then came Labour’s wrecking amendment which got through with Tory support. The voting was 33 for, 30 against (all Lib-Dems and Charlie Bolton) and 2 abstentions (both Tories I think, presumably the ones who recognised what a sordid business it was).

The Labour amendment is another example of Bradshaw’s weasel words, seeming to be pro walking and cycling but effectively keeping the door open for future bus rapid transit. But instead of using the Evening Post as his gullible mouthpiece this time he used Terry Walker, who almost seemed to believe that he was offering us something better.

The full resolution is as follows -

“Council notes the strength of feeling expressed by the citizens of Bristol against the possible shared use by rapid transit of the much loved Bristol-Bath cycle path.”

“Council further recognises that walking and cycling are vital components of the strategy to encourage more sustainable and healthier travel behaviour in our city.”

“While fully recognising the vital importance of improving public transport, Bristol City Council will oppose route proposals which undermine the current and future expansion of walking and cycling in Bristol, and, in particular, will oppose any threat to the current or future use of the Bristol to Bath cycle path.”

“Council requires further information about the various route options, including those on roads and for these to be the subject of full public consultation.”

“Council fully supports the Executive Member for Access & Environment in making these views known to the West of England Partnership.”

The weasel words are “undermine” and “threat” - who is to say if a route proposal “undermines” walking and cycling or “threatens” the Railway Path? Why, the Council of course. So they simply decide that a route proposal won’t “undermine” cycling and walking and that it isn’t a “threat” to the Railway Path and away they go with BRT on the Path, or anywhere they like.

Please note moderated comments were for 1 April only. 

Oh. And our man wandering around the Council House not doing very much passed the press office earlier and says Bristol City Council are preparing a press release about the path this very day … Ho! Ho! Ho!

Our man out on the town (again) reports …

“I was at a party talking to a woman whose best friend’s flat mate’s sister knows someone who works somewhere not unadjacent to chief Bristol City Council transport officer, Colin Knight.

“She was saying that Knight and his team are currently working night and day to come up with an alternative to a BRT scheme that’s not on the Railway Path.”

The climbdown cometh …

And another Labour councillor jumps ship and rejects their own transport boss’s BRT plan for the Railway path …

This time, after only 40-odd years in the Labour Party, Labour’s Lawrence Hill councillor, Brenda Hugill finally manages an entirely sane, rational and commonsensical view on something.

She tells Bristol Indymedia:

“The people of Lawrence Hill are overwhelmingly against this proposal which seeks to destroy one of the few amenities they have. We have already seen the community divided by the M32 and the inner ring road. Now is the time to stop carving this area up.”

Brenda’s joined in her independent media photocall by Easton Councillor Faruk Choudhury and Bristol West PPC Paul Smith.

Smith is once again flogging his tired “This BRT plan’s got nothing to do with the Labour Party, honest guv” line, telling, what he hopes must be some very credulous readers, “The Path has been put under threat by consultants working for the West of England Partnership.”

As if.

Maybe Paul’s secretive consultants entered Bristol under the cover of night in order to evade all known authorities as well? And perhaps they drew up their evil, secret BRT plans using the blood of virgins on parchment made from the skin of innocent socialists from a top secret cave hidden somewhere deep beneath the Clifton Gorge too? And maybe these plans were then passed, via a complex network of agents sworn to secrecy, to those shadowy bureaucrats-of-the-night at the West of England Partnership?

Alternatively it could be that the consultants were invited by our local politicians to draw up the plans on their behalf because that’s how the system actually works.