July 2009 - HYDE PARK AND WOODHOUSE ONLINE

Going after the student vote

Our Lib Dem councillors are trying to alter polling district boundaries and polling stations to enable more students to vote on or close to the university campus. If successful, their proposals would effectively disenfranchise many permanent residents. The first alteration would involve transferring voters from part of polling district HWD to polling district HWF. The Lib Dems give the following reason for the change,

“Most of the residents being moved into HWF are students at St Mark’s flats and student residents on Clarendon Road so would best be served by a polling station at the university.”

But what of the retired people who live in the Harrison Potter Home on Raglan Road. At present they can vote simply by walking down the road to Woodhouse Community Centre but under the Lib Dem proposal they’ll be required to go to the university campus to vote. The students who live in St Mark’s flats and Samara Plaza can presently quite easily vote at Woodhouse Community Centre, but it would not be so easy for permanent residents to visit the university.

The second Lib Dem proposal would require all the voters in polling district HWF north of Woodhouse Lane to vote at the new Marjorie and Arnold Ziff Building inside the university campus, instead of as at present, in the Parkinson Building. Apparently, the university has said that it will no longer allow the Parkinson Building to be used as a polling station, and the Marjorie and Arnold Ziff Building is the alternative being proposed by the Lib Dems, presumably with the agreement of the university. If this change goes ahead, it will deter many permanent residents from voting as most local people do not know their way round the university campus. If the Parkinson Building is no longer available for use as a polling station, then an alternative should be provided outside the university campus. Local residents should not be required to enter the university campus in order to vote.

The third Lib Dem proposal affects a polling district boundary not shown on the above map. If it goes ahead, it would mean that two student tower blocks would be transferred from polling district HWH to polling district HWG. The Lib Dems give the following reason for the proposal,

“Two new large student blocks, Concept Place and The Triangle are a lot further from the polling station in HWH than they are from the polling station in HWG at the Swarthmore Centre on Woodhouse Square”

This is actually not the case. The Triangle is equidistant between the two polling stations and Concept Place is only very slightly closer to the Swarthmore Centre. This proposal has been designed like the other two, with the interests of students in mind as the Swarthmore Centre is very close to the university. However, unlike the other two proposals, it appears to have no negative consequences for permanent residents.

Where you vote is supposed to be based on where you live. But for a very large number of students, our Lib Dem councillors are trying to make it more about where you study. And they’re doing this at the expense of permanent residents.

Reference

The Lib Dem proposals

Updating our MP

Representatives from local community groups met earlier today with Leeds Central Member of Parliament Hilary Benn to update him on Leeds City Council’s barbeque proposal and consultation exercise. The last time we met Mr Benn was on the 1st May and there was much to tell him about that had happened since then, such as the revelation that the barbeque proposal had come from three multi agency meetings held last year from which local community groups had been excluded; that the minutes of these meetings showed that in May, June, and July last year, the fire brigade had been called out to Woodhouse Moor 52 times at a cost estimated to be in excess of £100,000; that statistical evidence based on Parks and Countryside’s own figures supports residents’ claims that the vast majority of them had failed to receive survey forms, and that Leeds City Council’s Scrutiny board has ignored this evidence and the testimony of residents and given the consultation exercise the rubber stamp of its approval.

Mr Benn re-iterated his opposition to the barbeque proposal saying ” I think that it’s a very bad idea and I hope that the council won’t go ahead with it” and promised to do all he can to help the community in its efforts to get the scheme scrapped and the byelaws upheld. To this end, he gave us his permission to publish a letter he sent more than two months ago to Leeds City Council’s Chief Executive setting out his reasons for opposing the scheme, and saying that enforcement of the existing barbeque ban is the best option.

Back to school

Last night’s INWAC meeting was held at Hawksworth Wood Primary School, and it was just like being back at school for the many residents who had made the effort to attend. Newly elected chair Councillor Ben Chastney had clearly done his homework before the meeting and come up with a rule that allows him to prevent people asking questions. When people wanted to ask senior Parks and Countryside officer Phil Staniforth questions related to Woodhouse Moor, Councillor Chastney announced that questions could only be put if they were tabled in advance ! And so Mr Staniforth was spared having to answer any awkward questions. And councillors were spared the embarrassment that might have resulted.

And then Councillor Hamilton said he’d heard about the recent Hyde Park and Woodhouse Forum, and how unpleasant it had been. Councillor Hamilton said that councillors treat residents with respect, and that residents should reciprocate by showing respect to councillors.

I’ve deliberately refrained from mentioning what occurred at that Forum to spare Councillor Ewens any embarrassment. But now that the issue has been raised at INWAC, and since residents had no opportunity to reply, the record needs to be set straight.

Councillor Ewens drew up the agenda for the last Hyde Park and Woodhouse Forum without asking residents beforehand what they’d like to see on it. This is something Councillor Ewens always does, but on this occasion, residents voted for a different agenda, and as a result, Councillor Ewens offered to resign as chair. That was it. There was no unpleasantness.

And in relation to Councillor Ewens, the record also needs to be set straight regarding what Councillor Hamilton said about councillors treating residents with respect. It was not respect that Councillor Ewens was showing when she excluded residents from the multi-agency meetings that took place a year ago and which came up with the barbeque proposal – it was contempt.

Cashing in on our parks

In the Parks and Greenspace Strategy published earlier this year, Leeds City Council set out the ways it wants to make money from our parks. Since the strategy didn’t go into detail, it left us wondering how it would be implemented. Then a few weeks ago, Parks and Countryside showed that making money out of parks doesn’t have to mean selling off or leasing assets, or setting up chargeable facilities. it can be done by hiring our parks out to television companies who want to film there. That’s what happened recently to Hanover Square when independent television literally took over the Square for several weeks while they carried out filming for a new drama series. The marquee shown above was one of their props.

During the course of filming, the road at the bottom of the square was almost impassible as one side of it became a car park for the heavy lorries needed to store the equipment required for filming. Even though the lorries were partly parked on the pavement, the police and civil enforcement officers did nothing to enforce the law which makes it an offence to mount the kerb. And neither was any action taken when the production company flloodlit the entire square so that filming could continue into the early hours of the morning. Night literally became day for the residents of Hanover Square. Just another example of Leeds City Council’s lack of respect for local residents and their determination to exploit this area for all it’s worth. And when the tarmac cracks on the pavement at the bottom of Hanover Square, who will pay to repair the damage?