Green Waste Tax Imposed with no Consultation

At last night's Policy Committee, Reading Labour Group forced through the introduction of an annual fee of £50 for green waste wheelie bin collections, effective from 1st April 2017. (Residents will still have to pay the initial fee for a green wheelie bin, currently £36.10)

Labour showed themselves up for the hypocrites they are by failing to consult residents. Surely it would have been prudent to gauge public reaction by putting forward a choice of proposals to test the water? This would have enabled a much better informed fee level to be set, which in turn would have helped to take residents with the council, encouraged people to continue recycling green waste and thereby minimised the dropout rate.

Reading's Labour administration ignored the experience of another borough council which back in 2011 introduced a similarly large annual fee, resulting in a dramatic initial 60% reduction in users which picked up a bit but still saw a 36.67% reduction. Labour also ignored following Bracknell Forest's successful example of bringing in a £25 fee which resulted in no reduction in users.

Why did Reading Labour not broaden the scope of their report to Policy Committee to include the consequential costs to all of Reading's residents of an increase in green waste being dumped, either in landfill (grey) wheelie bins or fly tipped around Reading? These considerations were ignored yet could far outweigh the new income from Labour's annual charge from landfill tax and officer time clearing up future fly tipping.

My Conservative colleagues on Policy Committee voted against the £50 charge, but Labour's large majority rammed it through regardless.

Here is a link to the report.

Summer Re-surfacing Works' Schedule

Reading Borough Council’s annual summer road resurfacing is due to begin on Monday 8 August.

The only road in Caversham Heights on the list scheduled for resurfacing and traffic management is the Upper Woodcote Road in 2 sections: Richmond Road to Woodcote Way and Blagrave Lane to house no 188.  The road is due to be closed 3 days 9.30 am to 3.30 pm 9th August to 11th August.  The whole project is expected to last four weeks, weather permitting.

Advance notices will be in place in the days before work on a road begins. Notification letters will also be delivered to nearby residents and businesses affected, detailing the length of the works. Signed diversions will be in operation when road closures are required.

In some instances, temporary parking restrictions on roads other than those mentioned in the list below will be necessary for the work to be carried out as quickly and safely as possible.

The full list of roads scheduled for resurfacing and traffic management required is as follows:

1. Beresford Road (Rail Bridge to Barnwood Close and Portman Road between Beresford Road and Ashmere Terrace). Roads closed for 2 days 8.00 am to 8.00 pm 8th August to 9th August
2. Upper Woodcote Road (2 sections Richmond Road to Woodcote Way and Blagrave Lane to house no 188). Road closed 3 days 9.30 am to 3.30 pm 9th August to 11th August
3. Kings Road (Duke Street to Watlington Street). Road closed 3 days 8.00 am to 8.00 pm 11th August to 12th August and 15th August.
4. Basingstoke Road (Craddock Road to Winchester Road). Lane closures 1 day 8.00 am to 8.00 pm 16th August
5. Caversham Road (Abattoirs Road to Northfield Road). Road closed 3 nights 7.00 pm to 1.00 am 17th August to 19th August
6. The Forbury Road (Valpy Street to Abbots Walk). Road closed 2 nights 7.00 pm to 1.00 am 22nd August to 23 August
7. Kings Road (Gas Works Road to no 179 Kings Road). Lane closures 5 nights 5.00 pm to 1.00 am 29th August to 2nd September and 5th September
8. Caversham Road (Thames Avenue to Brigham Road). Road closed westbound 1 night 7.00 pm to 1.00 am 6th September
9. Northumberland Avenue (Canterbury Road to Cressingham Road). Road closed 2 days 8.00 am to 8.00pm 7th September to 9th September

NB: All programmed dates are subject to change depending on weather conditions

The Heights Sub-Committee Decides to Investigate Further the EFA’s Proposal

View across Mapledurham Playing Fields
from the Pavilion

At last night's "The Heights Free School Sub-Committee" meeting a decision was taken to investigate further the EFA’s proposal to purchase a leasehold interest of a small portion of Mapledurham Playing Fields (MPF) on which to build a permanent home for The Heights primary school.

The whole meeting was recorded on RBC’s webcast and can be viewed here.

Over 30 questions from the public had been tabled but there was only time for 11 of these to be put to the committee within the allotted half hour time slot.  Residents used their democratic right to grill the new chair, Cllr Debs Edwards, on many aspects of the proposal and how her committee was going to conduct itself.  Cllr Edwards answered the questions, sometimes deferring to the legal advice provided by Chris Brooks, RBC’s Head of Legal, sat next to her.

Immediately after the public questions, Mr Brooks was invited to provide the committee with his legal advice on the report.  He stated that this was the start of a statutory process and that at each stage a report would be brought back to the Sub-Committee and the common thread that will run through the decisions is that the Sub-Committee must act in the best interests of the charity.  Mr Brooks clarified the reason why the Sub-Committee could contemplate a proposal, which on the face of it to "perplexed" objectors challenged the Trust, by explaining: 

“there is a possibility that the outcome of this proposal may well be in the best interests of the beneficiaries of the charity [see * below].  By that I mean that the facilities that are to be provided, the money which would allow improvement for example of the recreation ground, those are matters that the councillors have to consider and do so with an open mind.  And the advice that I have received and I’ve given myself is:- to arbitrarily reject the proposal without considering it fully would actually be not acting in the best interests: But that might actually seem perverse to some people, but nevertheless that is the position that myself and my expert legal advisers have advised the Sub Committee.”

This was followed [at about 32 minutes in] with five minutes “in favour” of the EFA’s proposal split between Dan Pagella (a Trustee of The Heights) and Kerry Parr (a parent of The Heights); five minutes “against” from Martin Brommell (chair of the MPF Action Group) and finally a speech  from me on behalf of Mapledurham Ward residents and Users of MPF. 

Copy of my speech to the Sub-Committee

A synopsis of which is: I declared that the majority of my community is supportive of The Heights going on a small part of MPF; that the MPF Action Group campaigned unsuccessfully against my re-election because I refused to join their fight against the school going on MPF; that MPF Action Group represents only a small minority of the community (otherwise I would not have been re-elected because of remaining open-minded about the EFA’s proposal’s potential benefits to the MPF Trust).  On behalf of Mapledurham Ward residents and MPF users I asked the Sub-Committee to acknowledge the need to bring back the Pavilion’s facilities as soon as is possible; and to please support the popular view as well as the legal advice of Chris Brooks, that the best interests of the Charity would be met by considering the EFA’s proposal in more detail.

The Committee then asked questions of Mr Brooks and put their views to Cllr Edwards [at about 37 minutes in].  This enabled Mr Brooks to inform the committee of the answer to one of the unasked questions (tabled by Robin Bentham, WADRA’s chairman) which essentially asked whether the listing as an Asset of Community Value of the Pavilion together with its entrance and car park could prevent the EFA from buying a landlocked part of MPF.  Mr Brooks informed the committee that this would not impact on the future use of the land as a Free School. 

The meeting finished with a recorded vote, with all members deciding to support the EFA’s proposal being further investigated.

*  Since posting the above account I was contacted by Mr Brooks. Having considered his statement (quoted above) he has informed me that he should have been more specific and not added the reference to the beneficiaries. I am happy to clarify the legal point at his request that the Trustees act in the best interests of the Charity.

Action Against Idling Engines in Taxi Ranks

At Tuesday's full council meeting on behalf of a Mapledurham Ward resident I raised concerns about the pollution caused by idling diesel engines in taxi ranks.

I am pleased to say that Cllr Tony Page acknowledged the problem, agreed to look into the matter and bring back a report to the appropriate committee later this year.

GetReading coverage can be read here. 

BREAKING: RBC publishes EFA’s proposal to build The Heights on part of MPF

After business hours today (29 June) Reading Borough Council published a report detailing the Education Funding Agency’s proposal to build The Heights primary school on part of Mapledurham Playing Fields.

A public meeting of The Heights Sub Committee will be held on 12 July 2016 in the Civic Centre. The full agenda can be accessed here.

Highmoor/Albert Road junction: Outcome of last night's meeting

Faded/broken white stop line at junction

Last night local campaigners, CADRA (Caversham and District Residents Association) and Conservative councillors all spoke against the council’s proposal to change priorities at the Highmoor/Albert Road junction at RBC’s Traffic Management Sub Committee meeting (see my last post for further background).  I am pleased to report that the locally unpopular proposal was not agreed.  

The persuasive arguments against the proposal had Cllr Tony Page (committee chair) announcing his view that a decision to change the priority should be deferred before he had even asked the views of the committee members. 

Campaigners' outstanding frustration was Cllr Page’s refusal to instruct officers to repaint the white stop lines at the junction, despite requests from locals, my colleagues Cllrs Ed Hopper, Claire McDonald and me to immediately improve visibility of the signage at this tricky junction.  As you can see from this photo, what is meant to be a thick white line beyond the STOP is faded and broken. Officers committed only to inspect it.

What the committee did agree was that RBC officers would work with representatives from CADRA and HARC (Highmoor Albert Residents Campaign) to bring back a proposal which hopefully will gain local support in September.

You can watch the meeting proceedings of last night's meeting on RBC's webcasting. You can forward to the relevant sections which are 1a for questions followed by presentation of the petition and 7 for the public speaking, report and debate. 

RBC Pushes for Change of Priority at Dangerous Crossroads

Reading Borough Council (RBC) officers are recommending a change of priority from Albert Road to Highmoor Road at this local crossroads where numerous accidents have happened, the last of which on 14 May caused the tragic death of a 72 year old pedestrian.

Strength of feeling demonstrated by over 50 gathering
to protest with just a couple of hours' notice

RBC’s Traffic Management Sub Committee’s public meeting tomorrow (Wednesday 15 June), agenda item 7, the report sets out the officer preference to change the priorities as “This option is by far the most cost effective solution…[it] can be delivered without any further legal process so it is the easiest and quickest option to deliver...it is worth reducing the impact of the very restricted visibility within the Highmoor Road”

However RBC’s report admits that “This option does not change the visibility problem and relies on Albert Road drivers obeying the stop signs and giving way to crossing drivers from Highmoor Road...it has its limitations and does not meet the wider concerns of the original petition”.

View north up Albert Road. Photos by Tell Tails Photography

The Highmoor Albert Road Campaign (HARC), formed by local residents, is calling on RBC to improve safety of this dangerous junction.  They’ve carried out a survey of over 100 local households close to the junction to find out from a choice of 5 alternatives whether there is a popular option. The result is 90% of 134 households are in favour of option 1: A raised table designed to slow down the approaching traffic from all four directions.

RBC’s preference to change the priority of the traffic dates back to January 2015 when officers first made the proposal.  Back then residents, local Thames Ward Cllr Ed Hopper and I (Mapledurham Ward) all spoke against it.  A survey I took had 84% of households opposed to a change of priority.

I am canvassing opinion again (see my post detailing the outcome of January 2015 meeting) and would be grateful for feedback before tomorrow evening’s meeting so that I can speak up on behalf of my electorate.  Please email me: Isobel.Ballsdon@reading.gov.uk mobile: 07717 292003 or drop a letter through my door: 10 Fernbrook Road.  Thank you.