Consultation on ?improving? the junction of East Dulwich Grove, Townley Road and Green Dale

[holymoly]

Drawing your attention to the fact that the Townley Road junction decision, as approved by Mark Williams has been made and is now subject to refer to call-in. Anyone know how to make a call-in and what this entails?

See: http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?Id=5257

Summary

Decision maker: Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Planning and Transport

Decision status: Recommendations Approved (subject to call-in)

Is Key decision?: Yes

Is subject to call in?: Yes

Purpose:

Implementation of proposed strategic highway improvement scheme, subject to statutory procedures

Decision:

1. That the proposals received a majority of support taking into account all consultation responses received during the consultation period be noted.

2. That the response in the local consultation area itself did not show a majority of respondents in favour be noted.

3. That levels of opposition and response rates were significantly reduced from the previous consultation be noted.

4. That all the schools in proximity to the junction are in support of the proposed junction improvement be noted.

5. That the unanimous support for the proposals of the Dulwich Community Council be noted.

6. That the implementation of the revised proposals subject to the necessary statutory procedures be approved.

7. That pre and post implementation monitoring of air/pollution levels on Townley Road be agreed.

8. That further amendments be considered that will alleviate queuing on Townley Road when the detailed design work is undertaken.

Publication date: 02/04/2015

Date of decision: 01/04/2015

Date comes into force if not called in: 14/04/2015

Call-in deadline date: 13/04/2015

[first mate]

James Barber will know.

[Scootingover]

I would like to help BUT:

True to Southwark?s ?transparent? processes, it is hard to tell how the Oversight Committee operates. Do they consider real requests from the public or are they a self-determined spat between Councillors ? cynically, seems the latter?..

According to the website:

It seems that the decision to call in needs to come from the Oversight and Scrutiny committee; details here but on what basis call-in happens, is not disclosed:

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200494/how_we_work/3162/scrutiny_review_of_cabinet_decisions

Scrutiny review of cabinet decisions. The overview and scrutiny committee can review decisions made by or on behalf of the cabinet. This is known as 'calling in' the decision.

? Decisions may only be called-in in certain instances, for instance where it is believed that there was inadequate consultation or that the decision breaches human rights

? The chair or vice chair and three other members of overview and scrutiny committee must all agree that the decision should be called-in

? The call-in must be requested within five working days of the decision being published.

The decision will then be reviewed by overview and scrutiny committee, normally within two weeks from the date of the call-in request.

The overview and scrutiny committee can recommend that the decision is reconsidered by the original decision-taker.

You can view and print papers from call-in meetings.

Is that clear how a Scrutiny committee operates ? probably not.

It is not specific about how ongoing public concerns are placed on the radar for the Committee, or whether there is a self-determining group of Southwark elected officials making a decision based upon their latest penchant. Again, the cynic can legitimately suspect the latter.

Then try here:

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200494/how_we_work/3161/scrutiny_committees

And it seems that no-one involved in the executive decision making can be involved (that on the surface seems to rule out 3 local Dulwich Councillors :James Barber, Rosie Shimell (Vice Chair)and Jon Hartley)

So - what a clear set of instructions upon which Southwark Council can duck, dive, prevaricate, defer, dissemble, disenfranchise. XXXX-up.

[first mate]

Perhaps it needs an email to Mark Williams saying that many would like this called in, so can he tell us what to do?

Is James Barber allowed to steer or is he now too busy with the national campaign? From what you say it does sound as though he could ask for it to be called in. If he doesn't I'd want to know why? Ditto for Rosie Shimmell. In short have they listened to local opposition. And are they representing us?

I am now thinking that transparency of council process and consultation should be at the top of the next agenda for the next council elections.

[James Barber]

I can only ask for a call-in via my colleagues sittingon OSC. We'd have to have specific reasons of how this decision has been made incorrectly process wise or is contrary to plans and strategies.

I don't think it meets this criteria so any call-in would fail - BUT let me know why you think it should be called-in. Ideally in an email.

[Scootingover]

Just spotted this info on a parallel thread (Ask Me, James Barber thread). Absolutely relevant to this thread so excuse me making it apparent. I only saw it by chance.

Posted by first mate Today, 08:27AM

James, will you and Rosie Shimmell be calling in the Townley Road decision?

-----------------

Hi first mate,

I don't think so. A lot of time and effort has gone into these proposals by all parties and I can't see how the decision breaches any policies or strategies - which is reqired for a call-in to Overview & Scrutiny Committee.

Unless you tell me otherwise...

Regards [email protected]

--------------------

James, you are the expert and have far more knowledge of the process than I. I have a hunch that you support the decision too. It is just that there seems to be a disjuncture between use of process to reach the 'valid' decision desired by councillors (for whatever reasons) and local feeling/objections. Who was it said that 'process is the politican's friend'.

--------------------

Hi first mate,

As an opposition councillor we have to weigh up what we call-in via Overview & Scurtiny Committee. We appear to have upset Labour when we chaired this committee such that they now have a Labour chairperson - with a majority they decide this although it is breaking a long tradition of the leading party not chairing the committee that scrutinses the ruling party. We have always been reticent about using this call-in power for fear of Labour umbridge and losing it. With a council majority they can change the constitution as they wish. That is my reticence. Saying that in 2014 they changed the constitution to make it possible for Lib Dems to still be able to call-in decisions.

I've been copied an email sent to OSC members by residents and am very sympathetic to reasons for call-in B2,B3,B4. B1 at the meeting officers anssered to my satisfaction - turning circles for coaches during rush hour.

Regards [email protected]

--------------------

[mockingbird]

If JB is sympathetic - what does this mean? Forget the politics of labour vs others. This is supposed to be an Oversight committee to ensure transparency and due process. So will JB pursue?

Has Southwark Council stopped legitimate investigations happening? How can this Scrutiny committee be Labour chaired given the nature of its remit?

Are we looking at a serious and deliberate constitutional flaw that inhibits scrutiny.

[first mate]

Mockingbird, have you ever heard the term 'playing both ends against the middle'?

It feels like we do not have a person who can represent and push very real local concerns.

[hopskip]

The overview and scrutiny committee can review decisions made by or on behalf of the cabinet. This is known as 'calling in' the decision. The key rules around calling-in decisions are

? Decisions may only be called-in in certain instances, for instance where it is believed that there was inadequate consultation or that the decision breaches human rights

? The chair or vice chair and 3 other members of overview and scrutiny committee must all agree that the decision should be called-in

? The call-in must be requested within five working days of the decision being published.

The decision will then be reviewed by overview and scrutiny committee, normally within two weeks from the date of the call-in request. The overview and scrutiny committee can recommend that the decision is reconsidered by the original decision-taker.

So, it seems that the core members of the OSC are responsible for any decisions. OSC Reserve members (includes Barber and Hartley) don't have call-in rights as such. If a core member is not able to attend a meeting the reserve member would be asked to attend in their place.

Details of the OSC are here:

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=308

? Councillor Gavin Edwards (Chair)

? Councillor Rosie Shimell (Vice-Chair) Note: sits on Dulwich CC

? Councillor Anood Al-Samerai

? Councillor Jasmine Ali

? Councillor Catherine Dale

? Councillor Karl Eastham

? Councillor Tom Flynn

? Councillor Rebecca Lury

? Councillor Adele Morris

? Councillor Johnson Situ

? Councillor Evelyn Akoto (Reserve)

? Councillor Maisie Anderson (Reserve)

? Councillor James Barber (Reserve) Note: sits on Dulwich CC

? Councillor Dan Garfield (Reserve)

? Councillor Jon Hartley (Reserve) Note: sits on Dulwich CC

? Councillor Hamish McCallum (Reserve)

? Councillor David Noakes (Reserve)

? Councillor Martin Seaton (Reserve)

? Councillor Bill Williams (Reserve)

? Councillor Kieron Williams (Reserve)

Support officer: Shelley Burke. Phone: 020 7525 7344 E mail: [email protected]

[Tessmo]

That's interesting @hopskip. There clearly was inadequate consultation on many different levels. But I do wonder whether a Labour-chaired scrutiny committee (if what Cllr Barber says is correct) in a Labour-led council will have to courage to call the decision in...

[Tessmo]

Anyone heard whether Southwark's scrutiny committee is going to call in Councillor Williams's decision? Will anything be made public on Southwark's website?

[Errol]

Considering how Southwark treat people who work there, it does not come as a surprise to me that this issue has reached the conclusion that it has.

Most of the letters they claim to send out are in fact not sent out.

[first mate]

Errol, please do tell more.

[Bicknell]

Me too Errol ... That first consultation leaflet on the Townley Rd junction didn't reach everyone it was supposed to go to...

[@Woodwarde]

I have had confirmation from Southwark, that it is for the councillors who are members of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to make a case for call-in. They would have to be in by midnight tonight (13th April).

If Southwark do receive a call-in, then the officer concerned has a formal role of assessing whether it is a valid request in terms of the council?s procedure and rules. The officer has one working day to do that.

So, we should therefore be in a position to be advised tomorrow (Tues 14th) or latest Wednesday (15th) of the outcome.

I will update this thread when I hear more.

[first mate]

My view is that Councillors representing us wanted this to go through but did not feel it politic to be upfront about it so used the getout of appearing sympathetic to local concerns while stating the process ties their hands. I remember the same tactic being used for the M&S debacle.

What hope if those we voted in to fight our corner actually pursue a different agenda and one we are not necessarily aware of.

[macutd]

well said First Mate, absolutely right

[Green Goose]

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> My view is that Councillors representing us wanted

> this to go through but did not feel it politic to

> be upfront about it so used the getout of

> appearing sympathetic to local concerns while

> stating the process ties their hands. I remember

> the same tactic being used for the M&S debacle.

>

Exactly right. The DCC approved the scheme unanimously which means that every Councillor in Village, East Dulwich and College wards voted on favour of it - irrespective of whether they were Labour, LibDem or Tory.

Duplicitous b******s!

[@Woodwarde]

Southwark have advised that the decision has NOT been called in.

Mark Williams has advised that air quality for Calton and Townley will be measured to establish a base. No date given.

[Bicknell]

The odd crumb thrown out from Tooley Street Towers...

[first mate]

So that is that. Major changes effected with only the appearance of consultation, a seemingly corrupt process and our elected Councillors using that process as the reason why they cannot intervene on our behalf.

We see the same approach in regard to introduction of 'free' parking (in reality the roll out of restricted parking) and 20mph. All foisted upon us, genuine objections ignored, inadequate consultation, Councillors use forum to give appearance of supporting local voters but always seem to fail at last hour, citing process.

[Green Goose]

Yes, we got played for mugs by the Tooley Street cadre.

We can console ourselves at the forthcoming election.

[fazer71]

Green Goose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yes, we got played for mugs by the Tooley Street

> cadre.

>

> We can console ourselves at the forthcoming

> election.

How?

Labour have such a following in Southwark they'll never be replaced...

Unless

We all vote UKIP lol ... What a mad system ... We're just mugs ... run by mug voters .. and dogma .

[bawdy-nan]

I understand the frustration felt by people about this but it is hard to see how 113 people (who objected, locally, at the consultation stage) can hope to "unseat" Labour in the forthcoming election.

Am I misreading this? Beyond the tiny few who post here (and who obviously feel very angry and frustrated), the 113 who objected at the final consultation stage, is there really a massive local objection and rejection of the workings of local politics?

It might be very annoying not to have got your way but I'm not sure why you feel that you automatically ought to.

Unless, as I say, I am missing something, this seems like a noisy campaign but not one that commands universal support.

[richard tudor]

Perhaps many people were not aware of it apart from the chosen few in the know