The Bristow Blog

Licences again (this time the Carling Apollo)

I wanted to make readers aware of a licence application applied for by the Carling Apollo in Queen Caroline street close to Hammersmith Broadway.

The Apollo has applied to vary its premises licence - it would allow for events to be ran for 2,000 people up to 2am on twenty occasions a year.

It can be seen here -

http://www.maps.lbhf.gov.uk/epas/02c-info.asp?search=2007/04660/LAPR

This will not be directly relevant to much of Fulham Reach ward as the Apollo is too far away.  However, those residents living in the north of the ward may often see queues of people waiting to get in to the Apollo snaking down Fulham Palace Road - sometimes all the way down to Frank Banfield Park and Chancellors Road.   

This can obviously cause noise issues and problems of litter as fast food containers are often discarded.  I can understand why the Apollo may wish to have a late night licence but the needs of local residents also have to be considered. 

If affected (or simply interested) you may wish to comment on the application - you can do this by emailing licensing@lbhf.gov.uk quoting 'Licensing Application 2007/04660/LAPR'.  The closing date for comments is 6th November 2007.

Listening to Residents about our Parks

The applications for a licence to hold events in Ravenscourt and Bishops Park have caused concern amongst local residents.  There were a number of objections to the applications, and many residents contacted me personally as the cabinet member for Residents' Services voicing their concern.  The licensing meeting for these applications took place yesterday. 

The council have listened - these licenses now have conditions attached that should reassure local residents, and ensure we can put on a limited number of popular and successful events.

As the council initially applied for a broad premises licence, suggestions were made that the council were planning for events such as wrestling, boxing, late night pop concerts and festivals.  There were also concerns about the sale of alcohol.  Despite assurances to the contrary, there was still considerable unease about these licence applications.

After reading through the objections, listening to local residents, and speaking with ward councillors, the Residents' Services department amended the application at the meeting yesterday.  We placed restrictions on the timings and the scope of events, and strictly controlled the supply of alcohol.  We listened to and acted on residents' concerns.

• The times in which events can take place - 11am-11pm Mondays to Saturdays - and 11am -10pm on Sundays.
• Withdrawn the application for indoor sporting events, wrestling and boxing, and references to making music, pop and folk music, music festivals, historical re-enactments, and magic shows.
• Bishops Park will not be a venue for large events (except the Fireworks and Boat Race) and Ravenscourt Park will not be a venue for more than five large events.
• We accept the noise limits proposed by the public protection and safety section within the Environment department - and the restrictions proposed by the Metropolitan Police.
• Alcohol can only be sold between 11am and 10.30pm on Monday to Sundays and will not be permitted in public areas at large scale events.  Finally, it will only be available to event attendees who have pre-booked tickets.
• Generators will not be left running overnight.
• Event organisers will be responsible for the clean up and refurbishment of the parks, and for bearing the cost of these operations.

I am confident that these amendments will satisfy the vast majority of local residents.

Our parks are for the enjoyment of local people and their guests - it is important that this principle is paramount in the minds of those who wish to put on events in our park. 

Residents meeting on Rainville Road

My co-councillor Gavin Donovan organised a meeting last night with the residents in the blocks of flats on Rainville Road about cleanliness, fly-tips and anti social behaviour.  One block of flats is managed by Notting Hill Housing Trust and the other by H&F Homes.  It was important that we got Notting Hill and H&F Homes together in one room to ensure actions were agreed and essential repairs and improvements were carried out.

Some of the things that were agreed included:

• The communal ramp - H&F Homes Estates Service will sweep the ramp on a daily basis - they will also arrange for a structural engineer to come and inspect it for damp and other factors.
• Area in front of garages at the rear - H&F Homes Estates Service will sweep the area on a daily basis.
• CCTV cameras - crime prevention office at LBHF will check if the CCTV camera on Rainville Road can be used for enforcement of anti social behaviour as well as for enforcing the one way system.
• Street scene enforcement - to take action over Rainville Road flytip.
• Police patrols - the local safer neighbourhood team and estate warden service to be made aware of the anti social behaviour close to the bench in the estate.
• Design crime audit - crime prevention office at LBHF to produce a design out crime audit.
• Garage Unit - officers from this unit to attend the next meeting.
• Factsheet - a factsheet of contact details to be sent to local residents.
• Regular estate meetings - these meetings to become a regular fixture including representatives of H&F Homes and Notting Hill Housing Trust.

This was a very positive meeting and I hope the start of resolving a number of concerns shared by local residents and the Fulham Reach councillors.

Breach of privacy and electronic communication regulations?

A few weeks ago the MP for Ealing and S Bush, Andrew Slaughter sent a round robin email to a large number of people.  I myself did not get it but I was contacted by at least half a dozen ward residents asking how the MP had got their email address.  Andrew Slaughter is not their MP (his seat only starts north of the Goldhawk Road) as Fulham Reach ward is part of Greg Hands' Hammersmith & Fulham constituency.  I at first thought this was just a one off, but then my co-councillor Andrew Johnson also informed me he got the email!

The problem is not the content of the email (it was his usual guff attacking the Conservatives) but how he managed to get all these email addresses.

You might think he may have picked these up in the course of his work as an MP as many issues cross constituency boundaries.  However, as I said the list contained Conservative councillors (which just shows incompetence on the part of his staff) serious questions need to be asked. 

Greg Hands MP has also raised this matter as he also received a number of complaints.  Some of the people who receievd this email from Andrew Slaughter, despite having no contact with him, include Greg's wife, several national newspaper journalists, the Lead Advisor to the Opposition Chief Whip in the House of Commons and several of Greg's friends who don't live in the constituency. 

Where has he got all these addresses from?   

One likely explanation is that Andrew Slaughter is using part of a list originally compiled by Greg Hands for his weekly bulletin.  Readers have to subscribe to Greg's bulletin.  Andrew Slaughter was accused in the past of illicitly obtaining email addresses back in November 2005 - he was told to stop but it appears he has not heeded this warning.  The only thing that the people who received this email from Andrew Slaughter have in common is that they appeared on Greg's email list in November 2005.

The evidence suggests that it is inconceiveable that these individual email addresses were obtained by Andrew Slaughter by any means other than illicit methods in November 2005. 

The regulations on the use of email and electronic communication is clear -

http://www.ico.gov.uk/what_we_cover/privacy_and_electronic_communications/the_basics.aspx

“These regulations cover email, text (SMS) and any other form of unsolicited electronic message that falls within the definition of electronic meeting. Please see our detailed guidance for more information. Electronic mail should only be sent if the individual has asked for it. There is an exception to this rule, known as soft opt in. This applies when all three of the following circumstances are met:

    * The organisation obtained the contact details as the result of a sale or the negotiations for the sale of a product or service

    * The messages are only marketing their similar products or services and

    * The individual is given a simple opportunity to refuse the marketing when their details are collected and is given another simple way to do so in every future message.”

Looking at this situtaion, it would appear that Andrew Slaughter has breached the first two requirements of the regulations.  None of the people who have complained have stated they registered to receive these emails.  The 'soft opt in' rule would therefore not apply. 

I know that Greg Hands and local residents have complained to the Information Commissioner - will the Commissioner now take action?

Viva la France in Fulham

The Evening Standard this week picked up on the news that H&F council are in discussion with the French Government about offering a bilingual comprehensive school in south Fulham to local parents.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23417905-details/Bilingual+school+to+be+capital%27s+%27Little+France%27/article.do

If created, it would be the first bilingual comprehensive school in England.  It would offer both the English and French national curriculum.  It would be of course free to British citizens while French expatriate pupils would pay fees.  If a deal is done, the partnership would be between Hurlingham & Chelsea school and the Lycee Francais school owned by the French government.

Our part of London is home to largest French community in London - there is a clear need for the Lycee Francais to expand, and the scheme would give a unique and exciting offer to local parents.

The independent Fulham Schools Commission recommended that Hurlingham & Chelsea school should look at a partnership model to give it a more solid base for the future.  Results have improved at the school.  However, it remains the borough's most unpopular state school with parents and has a significant number of spare places.  This has the potential to be an exciting partnership model that more appropriately serves the need of the local community.  The commission also noted that the French model "could be the basis of a very attractive model".   

It would be excellent if that in a few years time results have improved further and the school was at capacity.  Other than Kensington & Chelsea, our borough has the least number of local parents choosing local schools for their children.  Too many send their children to private schools or state schools outside the borough.

This could be another example that shows our borough has a very exciting future.  Nothing is more important than ensuring that all local children fulfil their potential.

Fairness for Imperial Wharf station

What would you do if you had agreed costs for building work on your house or flat - and then suddenly the day before work was to be carried out, costs had increased by four times the original amount?  You would be extremely angry and quite right too.

This is what has happened with Imperial Wharf station.  With what should have been a 1.75 million project when the idea was first mooted in the late 1990s - the latest quote from Network Rail is 8 million.  A package had been agreed by Kensington & Chelsea, Imperial Wharf and Hammersmith & Fulham council.  This amounted to about 6 million.  But the price has shot up again.

This is very disappointing.  This station is urgently needed.  It would connect Sands End and south Fulham with Clapham Junction on the west London mainline.  The council, local residents, and community groups have been pressing for this for some time.  For Network Rail to increase project costs like this is another example of how Hammersmith & Fulham residents are treated with disregard by the powers that be in central Government and by the Mayor of London.

All the council and local residents want is fairness.  We want clarity and to know where we stand - not for the goal posts to be shifted at the last minute.  It is only right that Network Rail themselves dig deep and find the extra money.  This increased financial burden for a project agreed and costed a long time ago, should not fall on local taxpayers.

The Time of your Life

Today I went to the 'Time of Your Life' event at Hammersmith Town Hall.

Hundreds of residents flocked to the Town Hall for the ninth annual event.  The celebrations are aimed at local people aged 50 and over.   The enormously popular event attracted more than 700 visitors last year and aims to promote healthier, active ageing through a host of fun activities.

Older people help the council plan and run the event.  Older people themselves make sure that what is on offer is what people want, providing vital information in a fun, relaxed and informal way.

On offer was: Pensions advice, Blood pressure tests, help with healthy living and diet, housing advice, access to library facilities, and free coffee and tea all day.

Time of Your Life was organised by the Better Government for Older People team - with support from Agewell.

I am pictured with volunteers from the Hammersmith & Fulham Fair Trade Steering Group.  This is a froup which I hope to get very much involved with in the future.

OFSTED rate Bayonne Nursery as 'Outstanding'

I am a school governor at the excellent Bayonne Nusery School in the heart of Fulham Reach ward - Paynes Walk on the Bayonne Estate.  This is a role that I really enjoy and something I did before becoming a councillor.  This is something to which I wish I had more time to devote; it really is a wonderful community asset

The achievements of Bayonne Nursery have now been recognised by OFSTED (the watchdog rating schools across the country).  They rate the nursery as 'outstanding', and in every indication but one they also give an outstanding rating.  The first paragrpah sums up everything about this school:

The children achieve extremely well in this outstanding school.  They develop excellent personal qualities, behave extremely well and treat other children and adults with respect and courtesy.  The insprational and highly effective leadership of the headteacher and outstanding teaching staff benefit the children enormously.  Parents are overwhelmingly pleased with the school.  Nearly all pay tribute to the staff, 'Both my chikdren have attended Bayonne and we could not have asked for more. It is a fantastic school', is one of many typical comments, and they are right.  It is a superb school.

OFSTED are absolutely spot on.  Pat Logan is an excellent headteacher and the rest of the teaching staff do a fantastic job.  David Coleman, the Chair of the Governors, also ensures that the governing body is effective and is an asset to the school.  I am extremely grateful for the work that they do.  It is clear that local parents and the community share my views.

The school is located in a mixed area of private and social housing, providing the sort mixed education offer that we should aspire to in H&F.  Children could not wish for a better start in life than attending the Bayonne Nursery School. 

Today, I am extremely proud to be a school governor and a councillor in ward that contains such a fine school.

Saving money on press & PR

Residents may have noticed a newspaper dropping through their doors over the past few months called H&F News.  This is a council produced newspaper and allows us to communicate with residents and keep them informed of our plans.  It also runs local news stories and has a readers' letters page.

A council produced publication going through letterboxes is nothing new.  The previous Labour administration used to produce 'HFM' magazine - a glossy and snazzy publication.

I do not think that local people mind a council spending taxpayers money on a newspaper/magazine - as long as it is done responsibly.  After all, how else should a local council communicate with residents.  It is a duty of a council to offer local people information on changes and campaigns that will affect them and their neighbours.  However, the big question should be - how much money should be spent on this?  After all, this is not the council's money - it belongs to taxpayers. 

In Hammersmith & Fulham, the old adage that Conservatives councils cost you less proves to be true.  Such extravagance was poured on HFM magazine, the new administration was able to save 75% of the costs of producing the old magazine with H&F News.  The council has saved over £300,000 in total council spending on HFM/H&F News since 2005/6 to put back into frontline services.

The cost of HFM in 2005/06 was £411,299 - the cost of H&F News in 2007/08 was £100,000. 

This is yet another example of how the new Conservative council are delivering value for money - unlike the wasteful previous administration.

Street Drinkers down 62%

The number of drinkers on the streets of Hammersmith & Fulham has fallen by 62%.  A probe into the effectiveness of the borough-wide controlled drinking area revealed the excellent news that street drinkers and aggressive begging are being effectively tackled by the  zero tolerance effort of both the council and the police.

The council introduced tough new measures in November last year such as a £500 fine for boozers who refused to hand over the drink.  The parks police, as well as police officers themselves, have the power to pour booze down the drain. 

In Fulham Reach ward, there has often been a problem with street drinkers in and around Frank Banfield park, and up and down Fulham Palace Road.  Groups intimidate the public with begging and aggressive behaviour.  Drinking super strength lager or cider, they can often make local people's life very difficult.  This is something I have discussed on many occasions with members of the Hammersmith Embankment Residents Association. 

A survey that took place in August 2006 identified a total of 107 street drinkers across the borough - a corresponding survey last month now shows just 40 on the streets.  Over 88% of local people surveyed were in favour of the council scheme.

I am really pleased that this tough stance appears to be working.  It was what the Conservatives were elected to do.  I know we shall not be complacent and keep up the tough enforcement.  Law and order is one of the big dividing issues locally.  The local Labour Party and Andrew Slaughter have come out against 24/7 policing and the zero tolerance approach.  They claim it is 'not working'.  See http://www.hammersmithtoday.co.uk/default.asp?section=info&page=concrime083.htm

Local residents and the Conservatives know that you can only enforce tough measures with police on the streets.  That is why we will continue with 24/7 policing on the ground and a zero tolerance approach to crime and anti-social behaviour.