Share this article share on facebook icon share on twitter icon

To go to the full forum thread, click on its title.

    • Councillors welcome new mayor, but scrutiny change...
    • Another civil society group in Enfield has expressed its unhappiness about the new environment forum and the abolition of the separate forums discussing green belt issues, conservation and public transport. (a rather misleading name, they don't monitor traffic speeds but campaign to keep the green belt) has published the following comment on its website: A sad day for democracy in Enfield. The Council has voted to abolish the Green Belt Forum and two other statutory committees dealing with planning in conservation areas and public transport. The administration sent out the agenda last Friday for a virtual Council meeting on July 1 including a change to the constitution to replace the three committees with one tightly-controlled Environment Forum, which will meet monthly but with restricted participation from outside groups. Only 21 groups and one rep per group. We don’t know yet which the groups are or how badly you have to behave to be excluded. For many groups which rely on specific volunteer expertise in different areas, one representative to cover all these very complex issues is totally inadequate. It seems to be a blatant move to reduce democracy in the borough and...
    • In Other Subjects / Miscellaneous
    • Author PGC Webmaster
    • 13 Jul 2020 22:55
    • New plans for Fox Lane quieter neighbourhood revea...
    • I would agree that the Aldermans Hill / Cannon Hill junction should see close scrutiny for active as well as motor travel. The same, long running, argument applies to the Green Lanes / Hedge Lane / Bourne Hill junction, which is also dreadful to cross. I would add to focus on an increasing prevalence of zebra-blind drivers on Aldermans Hill; always an issue but seemingly deteriorating. I don’t buy the argument that the traffic, “has to go somewhere”. The same is often used regarding waste. Both start from the premise that it’s there to begin with; that is where the real aspect of choice lies.
    • In Planning and Development / Quieter Neighbourhoods
    • Author Karl Brown
    • 12 Jul 2020 11:30
    • New plans for Fox Lane quieter neighbourhood revea...
    • Agreed the surrounding roads need measures as well but the council have to start somewhere. On the u-turn point. Thames water recently closed our road at one end for a few days. All the delivery vans and trucks managed fine with u-turns and there was no traffic apocalypse on our street that I could see. Given lockdown has increased delivery vans/trucks this suggests they’ll manage just fine. A trial will help surface any issues.
    • In Planning and Development / Quieter Neighbourhoods
    • Author Alex Lyness
    • 10 Jul 2020 20:26
    • New plans for Fox Lane quieter neighbourhood revea...
    • I agree there will need to be measures on surrounding roads - and that junction is dangerous. Experience with similar LTNs shows there is traffic evaporation as people within the area walk and cycle rather than drive short journeys whilst others replan their journeys. There was both opposition and support for the previous scheme, but this is a new design which takes into account feedback - the consultation will be during the trial. If we are to address societal issues of pollution, safety, obesity, noise then there needs to be action to support active travel and reduce unnecessary car use. I can assure you there's nothing 'snobbish' behind the plans - I understand Enfield Council have plans for LTNs throughout the Borough.
    • In Planning and Development / Quieter Neighbourhoods
    • Author Adrian Day
    • 09 Jul 2020 20:48
    • New plans for Fox Lane quieter neighbourhood revea...
    • I live on Aldermans Hill and this scheme is a disaster for the residents on the surrounding roads. It is pushing all the traffic onto the outer roads and there is no mention of improving the safety of these roads. The junction of Aldermans Hill and Cannon Hill is a notorious blackspot yet nothing has been done to it in 10 years. This whole scheme is a snobbish attempt to push unwanted traffic into other areas. It has to go somewhere. You are going to have countless delivery vans doing U-turns on the blocked up roads and the roads are not wide enough if cars are parked everywhere. The consultation shows most residents are against this. Is there some sort of protest group acting against this scheme or a judicial review in progress?
    • In Planning and Development / Quieter Neighbourhoods
    • Author Darren McCarthy
    • 09 Jul 2020 19:58
    • Councillors welcome new mayor, but scrutiny change...
    • The particular point about these three panels - the conservation advisory group, green belt forum and public transport consultative group - is that they involve a high degree of participation by non-councillors, who provide some specialist input to the meetings. The new arrangement will involve far fewer of these external experts, some well established groups won't be represented at all, and in many cases the single representative of a group such as the Enfield Society or Southgate District Civic Voice won't be the person in that group best placed to input on a particular subject. The person who knows about conservation and heritage may know little about public transport, and vice versa. Members of the various civil society groups in the borough have between them hundreds of years of living in the borough - they know its history, they can remember what worked well in the past and what didn't, they use the trains and buses, they volunteer in parks, wetland projects etc etc. It's a slap in the face to exclude these people from the forums, even more so when it's been done without any public consultation whatever. There's a lot of unfair criticism of the council and of councillors....
    • In Other Subjects / Miscellaneous
    • Author Basil Clarke
    • 08 Jul 2020 22:05
    • Open letter to waste authority chair shows that ch...
    • Edmonton incinerator was the first of eleven incinerators that started operating in the 1970s and ONS data show that infant death rates in the Councils exposed to emissions all rose after the following incinerators started operating: Edmonton, Dudley, Wolverhampton, Coventry, Nottingham, Kirklees, Bolton, Sheffield, Newcastle (Byker), Birmingham (Tyseley) and Stockton-on-Tees (Billingham). There is no evidence to support the prevailing opinion that incinerator emissions don’t harm health, whilst ONS data supporting the opposite view is both consistent and overwhelming. Those thinking "Oh, but incinerators are different these days" should look at ONS data in recent years as infant mortality rates have also suddenly risen at council level after incinerators started operating in Peterborough, Plymouth, Exeter, Shrewsbury, Splott (Cardiff), Four Ashes (Staffs), Hartlebury (Worcs), Runcorn (Halton), Belvedere (Bexley), Greatmoor (Bucks), and Newhaven. Infant mortality rates suddenly fell in both Torfaen and Malvern Hills after incinerators closed down in Pontypool, in 2002, and Hanley Swan in 1995. The above aren't just a long list of random events, but precisely what should be...
    • In Other Subjects / Environmental Issues
    • Author Michael Ryan
    • 08 Jul 2020 15:40
    • Open letter to waste authority chair shows that ch...
    • The fundamental pieces driving the approach to waste in north London are currently all active. While the future still remains unclear that position should now be changing. The planned Edmonton Incinerator for residual waste has been well covered variously across this site: go ahead, pause and reflect, or cancel and rethink in the light of the rapidly evolving knowledge of risks relating to climate and air quality. We will know soon enough. That leaves recycling, and in particular the land at Pinkham Way, which the NLWA have long sought to designate for waste use via the NLWP. Exactly what for is their secret but in submitting to the NLWP inspector they indicated that without its inclusion the whole north London waste plan would be unsound, ie completely scuppered. That is a massive bet. (I think it's scuppered anyway as presented but that’s a different story.) However it’s not going to be straightforward, for as the second attachment in my post on 9 June under “Campaigners reject waste authority incinerator claims” reveals, the approach being taken in the draft NLWP means that the bigger the incinerator and the more waste is imported to feed it, then the case for land at...
    • In Other Subjects / Environmental Issues
    • Author Karl Brown
    • 08 Jul 2020 12:40
    • Open letter to waste authority chair shows that ch...
    • The meeting of the waste authority was reported in various local papers. Notably, the referenced the comment about Clyde Loakes being "extraordinarily rude" - a comment which in my view was completely justified. The , who in a single sentence paints a picture of the breadth of the opposition to the incinerator and the wide range of concerns: There is a telling quote from a doctor who represented one of the deputations: The , which gives greater emphasis to the defence of the project by Clyde Loakes, who as well as being chair of the waste authority is leader of Waltham Forest Council.
    • In Other Subjects / Environmental Issues
    • Author Basil Clarke
    • 04 Jul 2020 23:40
    • Covid Streetspace: Bike lanes, school streets, low...
    • On 3rd July deputy council leader Ian Barnes posted the following message on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1491332947831990/permalink/2382424648722811 "Bus gates" are a type of infrastructure that TfL and DfT are encouraging councils to use when creating low-traffic neighbourhoods. A bus gate, probably using automatic number plate recognition, would allow buses through, but either no cars at all or only cars registered as belonging to people living in the neighbourhood. "Tranche 2" refers to the second tranche of Covid Streetspace funding from Transport for London that London boroughs will be bidding for. Currently TfL are still allocating Trance 1 funds.
    • In Planning and Development / Traffic, Roads and Parking
    • Author Basil Clarke
    • 04 Jul 2020 19:15
    • Urgent: Contact your councillors about Council com...
    • The Enfield Council Labour Group today issued a press release stating that the changes are in response to calls to bolster and improve scrutiny and extra accountability and transparency in additional formal Committees of the Council. The press release also states that for the tenth year in a row Labour Councillors have refused automatic pay increases to their Councillor allowances.
    • In Other Subjects / Miscellaneous
    • Author PGC Webmaster
    • 02 Jul 2020 00:03
    • Urgent: Contact your councillors about Council com...
    • I hope that Southgate District Civic Voice will forgive me for republishing this message that they sent out to members today, but it draws attention to a significant change to our local democratic structures that the council will be voting on at its Annual Meeting, which is tomorrow evening (1st July). Like SDCV, I'm concerned that the new Environmental Forum will not be capable of effectively feeding in views and scrutinising the council's actions on three different topics: heritage and conservation; the green belt; and public transport. I'm also concerned that this is the first I've heard of this proposal, despite doing my best to keep up with the council's work. I believe that a major change like this should have been the subject of a public consultation. I'll be emailing my ward councillors tonight saying so. If anyone reading this shares these concerns, I urge you to contact your councillors - the email addresses for councillors in the former Southgate UDC area are all at the bottom of the message, but this is obviously of concern to residents of the entire borough. To find other councillors visit this page: https://governance.enfield.gov.uk/mgFindMember.aspx. Basil...
    • In Other Subjects / Miscellaneous
    • Author Basil Clarke
    • 30 Jun 2020 19:31
    • Campaigners reject waste authority's incinerator c...
    • Eight local branches of Extinction Rebellion (XR) today issued the following press release Doctors to ask councillors to review incinerator plans to reduce death, disease: "You will save more lives than we will in our entire careers" LONDON, 25 JUNE 2020—Today doctors, MPs, councillors, and campaigners will be asking the North London Waste Authority (NLWA) to reconsider plans to build a large incinerator in Edmonton, statements released in advance of an NLWA board meeting show. MPs Kate Osamor and Iain Duncan Smith are among today’s speakers, who are expected to highlight various issues of concern, such as the risks a new incinerator would pose to people’s health, social justice, the environment, and financial stability—amid fears of a deep post-Covid recession. ‘We are asking the North London Waste Authority to pause and review their plans to build a new incinerator in Edmonton as air pollution and the climate emergency are preventable causes of disease and death,’ Dr Rebecca Redwood, a GP in Waltham Forest, is to tell the 14 board members of the waste authority, who have the power to draw up plans that are more in line with climate emergency declarations,...
    • In Other Subjects / Environmental Issues
    • Author PGC Webmaster
    • 25 Jun 2020 13:23

Recent forum topics

Forums index