A Sad Day - Irene Hart RIP

I attended the funeral today of Irene Hart, wife of Mill Hill Councillor John Hart. Whilst I may disagree with John on some matters of politics, I like him and find the Mill Hill far more interesting for his presence. John was born in India and brought up in the days when Political Correctness was simply a figment of George Orwells imagination.

The service was beautiful. John had chosen a fine selection of traditional hymns, starting with How great thou art. Despite my love of Punk rock, I always prefer the the traditional hymns at a service. The readings were equally well chosen, featuring two from St Paul and one from Johns Gospel, all talking about why we should not fear death.

When the mass had finished, John addressed the congregation with a beautiful Eulogy about Irene. At such events you learn so much about people. How she was raised learning Catalan, the hardships her family suffered in the Spanish Civil war, how she studied medicine and switched to Philosophy. How John met her and courted her over Chess and Coffee. They were married for over 50 years. John spoke of the good times and there was a beautiful picture of Irene on the front of the order of service.

Irene has not been well for several years and her illness dimmed her flame. For the last couple of years John has not had an easy life, but he has never complained. I've known of how much effort John has put into making sure Irene was comfortable at home. Like many people who has a partner with failing health, he took the burden on with dignity and without complaint.

Afterwards, we retired for a rather good wake at the Three Hammers. The buffet was excellent and it was nice to have a chat with a few of Johns friends in a social setting. As ever John managed to tell me a not quite PC joke and he seemed to be enjoying being surrounded by friends and family. When I lost the 2010 election, I took a bit of solace in the fact that John is Mill Hill through and through. He's had a difficult time and it must be so difficult losing a partner after over 50 years together. John has many good times to look back on. John wrote a book a couple of years ago that was actually rather good, maybe he'll write a follow up now he has a bit of time on his hands. I promised him I'd buy him a pint next time I saw him. I am sure that the rest of his friends and family will keep him entertained over the coming weeks and months. I never really knew Irene, but from Johns eulogy, it is clear that was my great loss, she sounds like an incredible character, who lead an amazing life. Rest in Peace Irene.

Pavillion Way Sports ground redevelopment - Update

I have received confirmation from Barnet Council regarding the contents of secret papers discussed by the Barnet Council Cabinet Resources committee. Whilst the member in question is not prepared to go on record, they have confirmed that the Committee were fully briefed on the details of the restrictive covenants regarding the site. They have also confirmed that the Council DO NOT intend to share this information with the residents affected.

The covenant on the land allows for any resident on the estate to the South and East of the playing fields to have the right to enforce the covenant, which would require the council to properly maintain the sports ground and to prevent sale and redevelopment of the ground.

The Barnet Eye believes that the Council has failed in its statuatory duties by not publishing the covenant in the "Legal Issues" section of the cabinet papers, that would be visible for all to see. The Barnet Eye accepts the point that legal advice concerning the covenant can be withheld (as opposed to should be).

The decision to refer the decision back to Cabinet by the Scrutiny committee was made on Tuesday Night


We note that Chair of the Committee, Hugh Rayner, who has interests in property development, voted against referal. Good to see Tories John Hart and Brian Gordon standing up for the residents of Burnt Oak though.

Saracens Match Day CPZ - Update from the Council

The following update regarding the Saracens RFC Matchday CPZ was published today on the Barnet Council website. We have published it in full without comment as we believe this is of interest to many people in Mill Hill. The original is available by following the link detailed below.

http://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=4557

Neil Richardson, the Highways Manager, provided the Committee with a verbal update on the Saracens Event Day Controlled Parking Zone. 

Mr Richardson informed the Committee that the primary features of the Event Day Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) were:

• To ensure effectiveness for the area;
• To ensure that the use of the developed Barnet Copthall Stadium did not adversely impact on residents and traders and other community based activities; and
• That Saracens would meet all reasonable costs to introduce and maintain the measures, including enforcement of any restrictions introduced.

The Highways Manager advised the committee that kick-off times would be varied throughout the season and that there would be no kick-offs before 12.00 noon. 

The Committee were informed that there were 7,500 people in the CPZ that were eligible to apply for a permit or visitor’s vouchers.  Households could apply for up to 88 parking vouchers per annum, with additional vouchers being made available to support congregations and other community activities.

The Highways Manager noted the importance of making sure that the highways were safe for all road users.  The Committee were advised that only one test match had taken place so far at the Copthall Stadium on 27 January 2013.  Officers reported that “light” enforcement had been undertaken on that day where vehicles in contravention of parking restrictions were given a leaflet advising of the Event Day parking controls and advising drivers of the dates of the remaining matches for the current season.  The Highways Manager also advised the Committee that a similar approach would be taken at the next match on 16 February 2013, but that yellow line restrictions would be enforced.

Lisa Wright, the Traffic and Development Manager, informed the committee that Officers will be monitoring each match of the current season to assess the parking impact.

The Highways Manager informed the Committee that they would be carrying out another consultation with every property in the area at the end of the current season, asking for views on the scheme.  Comments made would be taken on board to help determine whether any changes to the scheme might be required moving forward. 

Referring to the light enforcement, where leaflets were given to cars that would otherwise have received tickets, a Member questioned how many of these leaflets had been issued.  He was advised by Officers that the figure was approximately 140 leaflets.  Responding to a question, Officers informed the Committee that the vehicles that were leafleted as part of the light enforcement were situated throughout the CPZ.  Officers advised the Committee that the attendance for the match was approximately 3,700.  The Committee noted that as this was a test game, the maximum attendance would be in the region of 4,000.  Attendance was expected to be higher at future matches.

A Member questioned if it was unusual for residents to not have to pay for permits.  Officers responded that it was, but that they were being provided at zero cost to residents by Saracens in recognition that there would be some impact on residents on match days.   Responding to a question from the Committee, the Highways Manager advised that the resident’s permits and parking vouchers arrangement was legally binding.

The Chairman invited Mill Hill Ward Councillors, John Hart and Sury Khatri, to address the Committee.

Councillor John Hart noted that the scheme was still in its early days.  He informed the Committee that many people were unhappy with the five hour period of the parking restrictions, and questioned whether this period was necessary.  Councillor Hart informed the Committee that he had attended the Mill Hill Resident’s Association with Councillor Sury Khatri where approximately 300 people had been in attendance in relation to this matter. Councillor Hart also highlighted that people could misuse the parking vouchers. 

Councillor Hart highlighted to the Committee that the attendees of the last match were largely from the home team and suggested that these attendees could be managed more easily that the supporters of the visiting team.  He informed the Committee that the Copthall Open Space should be considered as an open space for everyone.  Councillor Hart also noted that improvements had been made in the area as a result of the development.

A Member referred to Councillor Hart’s contribution to a previous Planning and Environment Committee and asked Councillor Hart to confirm that Saracens had agreed to that the maximum capacity of the stadium would 10,000 people and no more.  Councillor Hart confirmed that this was correct.

Councillor Sury Khatri addressed the Committee and highlighted his concern that Ward Members had not had enough involvement in the early discussions with Officers and Saracens.  Councillor Khatri questioned whether resident’s interests were being adequately considered.  Councillor Khatri suggested that all matches should start at 3:00 pm and raised concern over residents being able to have quiet enjoyment of their everyday lives.  Referring to the Human Rights Act, Councillor Khatri questioned the impact of the CPZ and stadium on resident’s rights to family life. 

A Member questioned Councillor Khatri on the 88 parking vouchers that are available to each household within the area.  Councillor Khatri informed the Committee that he did not consider this number to be sufficient.   

The Chairman then invited the Leader of the Council, Councillor Richard Cornelius, and the Director for Place, Pam Wharfe, to address the Committee.  The Director for Place invited Councillor Khatri to meet with her to discuss his concerns further. It was agreed that the meeting would involve all affected Ward Councillors.

Ms Wharfe also noted that the planning application that had been made was for 10,000 attendees only.  The Leader of the Council reaffirmed the fact that should Saracens wish to increase capacity to 15,000 in the future, then another planning application would be necessary.

The Highways Manager stated that he believed that Saracens were working to ensure that the scheme had minimal impact on residents.  Responding to a question, he informed the committee that 3,192 resident’s permits and approximately 118,000 parking vouchers had been issued, and that Saracens would pay the Council the amount for the given number of permits or vouchers issued. 

A Member raised concerns that people who were travelling to watch a match might consider that a parking ticket on account of a parking contravention could be factored in as part of the cost of a day out.  The Highways Manager informed the Committee that this was a possible risk, but where safety was being compromised, the police could be involved. 

Officers advised the committee that they were keen to conduct an audit of resident’s views of the success of the scheme, and would allow people plenty of free text to provide their opinions.  There will also be the option of both online and hard copies. Ward Councillors requested that they were involved with the drafting of the consultation.

A Member questioned what consultation had taken place at the beginning of the scheme.  The Director for Place informed the Committee that the consultation had formed part of a planning application determined by a the Planning and Environment Committee who considered that a CPZ was necessary in order to manage the impact on residents and that Officers have subsequently conducted statutory consultation. 

Councillor Khatri suggested that electronic signs should be considered as a way of reducing the five hour time period for parking restrictions.  Officers agreed to investigate the cost of variable signage.

RESOLVED that:-

1.      The Committee note the update on the Saracens Event Day Controlled Parking Zone as set out in the report and as detailed above. 

 

2.      Members note the request that adjacent Ward Councillors be involved in the CPZ review at the end of the season.

 

3.      The Committee note the invitation from the Director for Place to meet with Mill Hill Ward Members

 

4.      Officers are requested to give consideration to the costing installing variable signs for the CPZ zone.

 

5.      That the Committee requested to receive update on the review of the Saracens Event Day CPZ scheme which would be conducted at the end of the current season.

Publication date: 11/03/2013
Date of decision: 07/02/2013

Mill Hill Conservative Councillor wins plaudits for telling the truth

Mill Hill Conservative Councillor Sury Khatri has set a fine example of how a decent, honest councillor should behave. Mr Khatri is a sceptic in regards to the One Barnet program. At a recent meeting with Mill Hill residents, he conceded that the case hadn't been made. It appears that he stood his corner in an internal Conservative group meeting, telling them that they had no democratic mandate for One Barnet as it hadn't been mentioned in the manifesto. Local Tory MP, Matthew Offord attempted to shout down Mr Khatri, but Mr Khatri stood his ground. Mr Khatri is one of the most intelligent and decent of the Barnet Conservative councillors. I stood against him in the 2010 Council elections. When the result was announced, I shook his hand and said "As you are now my councillor, I hope you repay the trust that the people of Mill Hill have placed in you". It appears that Mr Khatri is showing he is well worthy of that trust. Here is the article from the Press newspaper which details Mr Khatris comments.

I hope Mr Khatris honest and sensible stand is recognised by his colleagues. It is clear that, unlike many of his colleagues, he has bothered to listen to both sides of the argument and recognised the flaws in the plan and the total lack of democratic accountability in the process.

It is only fair to also say that Mr Khatri is not a "natural rebel" or a troublemaker. He has found the situation he has found himself in almost impossible. He recognises the fact that many of his colleagues have not done their homework and are not listening to the people they are supposed to represent. When I spoke to him after the Mill Hill meeting, it was clear to me that he was extremely troubled. He promised the people at the meeting that he would take our concerns back to the Leadership and discuss it. His colleague Councillor John Hart also told me that the way to deal with these issues was to discuss them in a calm and rational way and look at the evidence.

One must conclude that Mr Khatri has done this and drawn the conclusion that the project should be abandoned. For this we must recognise his decency and honesty. I am also pleased to see that Matthew Offord MP has come off the fence and stated his support for One Barnet. Mr Offord knows all about how well Barnet Council manages contractors, he managed to overspend by £11 million on a £12 million project at Aerodrome Road - http://barneteye.blogspot.co.uk/2009/05/undynamic-duos-aerodrome-road-bridge.html  - I hardly think he's the man to lecture anyone about managing contractors.

Three cheers for Councillor John Hart

I bumped into Councillor John Hart in Mill Hill Broadway today. He was selling poppies for the Royal British Legion in the rain. We have them on sale at my business, Mill Hill Music Complex ( http://www.millhillmusiccomplex.co.uk/ ) in  the foyer of the studio.

I am a full on supporter of the Royal British Legion and the Poppy appeal. Our business also collects for "Help for Heroes" in Association with BALLS Motorcycle club. Next week we are handing over £500 raised jointly to the charity. I believe that anyone who has served in the armed forces is owed a debt of gratitude. We have a volunteer army, and I believe that whatever faults this country has, we are a force for good in the world. Their is no more tolerant and diverse city in the World than London. That is because people have made sacrifices.

That is why I say three cheers for John Hart and every other person in the land who stands out in the rain (as John did) or the sunshine collecting for this cause. John is in his 80's and if he can make the effort, we all can.

What are councillors supposed to do?

Several of my loyal army of readers seemed to be a little upset that I'd been less than nice to one of the Barnet Councillors yesterday. As I made my way at 6.30am to the The Passage Day centre for Londons Homeless in Victoria, to feed the hungry homeless, I pondered just what it was that specifically annoyed me about the performance of said Councillor. I realised that I was asking myself the wrong question. In fact, with all the blogs and all of the talk recently about "no confidence votes", we all have. The question we have to ask is "What are Councillors meant to do?". Perhaps the next question is one for individual Councillors. Are they doing what they are meant to do? I suspect that perhaps 95% of the residents of Barnet don't really know what Councillors are supposed to do (as opposed to what they actually do).

Councillors in Barnet get £10,000 a year for being a councillor (substancially more if they are in the cabinet or chair of a committee). For this they only have to do one thing to be legally entitled to claim the dosh. They have to turn up to 2 Council meetings a year. So that is the legal requirement, but I daresay that is not what anyone would agree is a satisfactory answer.

Councillors are elected for a four year term. There are 21 wards in Barnet and each has 3 councillors. Let us clear up the first misconception. Councillors are not supposed to "run the council". Even the Leader, Richard Cornelius is not supposed to do this. This job is done by the CEO and his team of executives. The role of the Council is to "decide council policy" and to make sure officers implement it. Councillors are elected by the residents and are meant to represent residents wishes. They have the power to intervene and take action when officers do not act in the best interests of the people of Barnet. They should make sure that officers implement the agreed policy. If you have a problem with a council provided service, a Councillor is supposed to make sure that you have been treated correctly by the Council. A diligent councillor holds regular surgeries for constituents and uses these to speak to residents and undertake casework. In Mill Hill, the local Tory Councillors do this on a Saturday morning at Mill Hill library.

As I pay the councillors to represent me (via my taxes), I expect them to listen to my concerns and if I have a genuine grievance, to act on it accordingly. As the local Councillors in Mill Hill are Conservatives, they were elected to impliment the Conservative manifesto. If I don't like something the Council are doing, but it was a policy laid out in the manifesto, I have no grounds for expecting them to act upon my complaints. I will have the opportunity in 2014 to get another party elected. That is my democratic right. If the council is implementing a policy which was not in the manifesto, the Councillors may still be within their rights to ignore my requests to act. They should however listen to me and explain the reason for their decision.

The One Barnet program was not included in the Conservative Manifesto in 2010, nor was the plan to hike parking charges. As such, my Conservative Councillors lack a democratic mandate to implement the changes. They have a legal power to do it, but the two things are different. I would expect my councillors to make the case for the changes, if asked. At a recent meeting, two of the Councillors Sury Khatri and John Hart met and discussed the issues with residents. They undertook to take our concerns back to the leadership. As such, I have no issue with the two gentlemen. They are doing what Councillors should do.

We then turn our attention to the person who inspired this blog. His name is Dean Cohen and he is the cabinet member with the responsibility for parking. I have a degree of sympathy with Councillor Cohen. He inherited a poison chalice from Brian Coleman when he was sacked. That is where the sympathy ends. He took over the role in May. It is now November. Dean Cohen has just announced his plan to remedy the mess Brian Coleman left him. His planned measures, to be trialled in North Finchley are:



- A 35% reduction in current parking charges on-street to increase turnover with a proportionate slightly less reduction for off-street car parks to ensure overall parity. 

- The introduction of dedicated business parking bays within off-street car parks, to increase on-street parking space. 

- Making a number of on-street parking bays a 2 hour maximum stay to increase turnover. 

- Adapting existing on street loading bays to allow a 15 minutes free parking period after 10am to promote rapid turnover. 

- Introducing a 15 minute stay facility on pay-by-phone bays. 
 
- Introducing a number of new ‘Pay-by-Phone’ short-stay parking bays at specific locations in the High Street to increase on street parking availability. 
 
In addition to the parking review changes, six on-street credit and debit card payment machines will be installed in the New Year. In yesterdays blog, I posted a link to Dean Cohens response to Alan Schneiderman. Councillor Cohen refused to entertain Councillor Schneidermans request for a "free parking period" to boost the High Streets, on the grounds that it would cost too much money. Now I thought that Cohens arguments were weak to say the least. Here are the reasons why

1. The special parking account is over £1 million under budget since NSL took over enforcement. Mr Cohen does not address this huge black hole at all.

2. Mr Cohen claims the changes proposed by Labour would cost money. The hike in parking charges has resulted in a massive defecit in the budget. If Mr Cohen was a serious politician, he would have addressed all of the relevant issues in a costed scheme and have the figures to hand.

3. The figures Mr Cohen attributes to the cost of the Labour amendment are highly dubious. I did some calculations and I think it is unlikely that the officers have got the figures right. Mr Cohen should have challenged these figures and ensured that his answers were robust and credible. Do the maths yourself if you don't believe me.

4. Dean Cohen is delivering the new credit card operated meters in January, after the busiest time of the year for retailers. Presumably their could have been a mini bonanza in parking fees if he'd got the meters in now. They have been planning this for six months.

5. Dean Cohen has sought to repair some of the damage caused by Brian Coleman. Allowing 15 minutes parking in loading bays after 10am is a sensible move, but doesn't address the primary issue that parking charges have been used as a stealth tax. The raise is still well above inflation.

6. Mr Cohen states that if the money is not collected from parking charges, then roads may not be resurfaced. I was under the impression that parking was not the sole source of revenue for Barnet Council. If they were to cut waste (which you know there is plety of) then they could resurface roads and give the High Street a boost. By auditing the Metpro contract properly, the council saved £450,000 on work costing £1.4 million. That is one contract. Barnet only intend auditing 173 out of 9,300 contracts. RM Countrysides were told they could charge what they liked for removing meters. How many other dodgy deals are there out there. Mr Cohen gets paid £24,000 as cabinet member to stop the Council officers taking the piss out of the taxpayer. I think he has not done this.


So in short, I believe that Councillor Cohen has failed to represent the needs of businesses and residents properly. As a councillor and a cabinet member, he has a duty of care to us residents to work tirelessly on our behalf. He may be a nice chap, have a lovely Dad and be very bright, but he is a councillor and a cabinet member and he is paid by you & I, the taxpayers of Barnet to do a job. There are several Tories who are backbenchers, who are hard working and have sharp minds. Three that spring to mind are Brian Salinger, Mark Shooter and  Sury Khatri. I cannot believe that any of these would have done such a poor job of getting to grips with the mess Brian Coleman left in the parking department. 

We must acknowledge that Dean Cohen is an improvement on Brian Coleman, but to be honest, wouldn't just about anyone be? His "trial" scratches the surface of the problem and does nothing for 18 of the 19 High Streets in the London Borough of Barnet.  That is not good enough for the people of Barnet. It is time that the Councillors started to take their job as seriously as they take collecting their allowances and it is time the cabinet started working as hard at dealing with the issues as they did at raising their allowances after the 2010 council election. 

Is that really too much to ask.
 

Councillor Dean Cohen defends his erm, er, erm, er Parking policies

Here is a clip from last nights council meeting, featuring Councillor Dean Cohen, responding to Councillor Alan Schneidermans proposals for a fairer parking regime for the Boroughs High Street. Councillor Dean Cohen is not the worlds finest orator. Here's a litte game to play. The clip is 4 minutes and 48 seconds long. See if you can count how many times Councillor Cohen says "Erm" and "Er".



The Barnet Eye counted 79. That amounts to one every 3.6 seconds. There are machine guns that fire bullets slower than that. He should take a few lessons in oratory from Councillor John Hart

A history lesson from Councillor John Hart

As usual, the most entertaining speech in Barnet Town Hall last night was from Councillor John Hart. I thoroughly enjoy the old boy when he's on form. After a recent meeting he gave me some sound advice, suggesting I'd be far happier if I gave up blogging and followed the French example and got myself a mistress. When I suggested to John that my wife wouldn't approve, he disagreed "You'd be so much less of a miserable git that she'd be over the moon". I am not convinced.

John last night stated that the demise of the High Street was nothing to do with parking charges, in fact they'd been brought in to help the shops by unclogging parking spaces. I really must take John up to see Helen Michael in Finchley, I think she may be able to "educate" him a little as to where his thesis is flawed.

I think John has rather missed the point. I sometimes bump into him in Waitrose in Mill Hill (which has free parking) stocking up on the fine malt whisky and quails eggs which keep him so young and virile. Anyway, here is his tour de force. John beat me in the last council election. For all his faults, I'm glad that if someone had to beat me it was him, he is good value for money.


By the way, for those with memories as long as John Hart, back in 2010, I posted a fascinanting guest blog from Audrey Shaw, listing the shops in Mill Hill Broadway in 1957 and what they are today. I am sure John would approve. It says much about the way our lives have changed

http://barneteye.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/tides-of-change-in-mill-hill-broadway.html

Barnet Eye Exclusive - First picture of the New Barnet Council cabinet following last nights emergency reshuffle

The New cabinet l-r -
Daniel Seal - Cabinet member for counting paperclips and other boring tasks
Melvin Cohen- Cabinet member for selling off cemeteries, libraries and other public assetts
Dean Cohen - Cabinet member for fleecing the motorist
Maureen Braun - Cabinet member for sheds and garden overdevelopment
Graham Old - Cabinet member for filing cabinets and dustbins
Andrew Stonglou  - Cabinet member for supplying beds and transportation of the elderly
Richard Cornelius - Leader of the Council
Hugh Rayner - Cabinet member for Property development
Daniel Thomas - Cabinet member for livestock and poultry
Little Robert Rams - Cabinet member for the protection of earwigs
John Hart- Cabinet member responsible for issues with women
Andrew Marshall - Deputy Leader
David Longstaff - Cabinet member for being nice to the plebs
Lisa Rutter - Cabinet member for aerobics, wellbeing and fitness

***** Update ****** Sorry, apologies. It appears our usually reliable inside source in the Barnet Conservative party has not been entirely honest with us and this is not actually the new cabinet. Many apologies for leading our readers up the garden path (yet again).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer.

This post is a Friday Humour post and we ask that no inference at all is drawn from it. The Barnet Eye would like to categorically state that none of the members listed bear any resembelance whatsoever to any of the muppets or share any of their character traits. We wish to apologise to the Muppets, who are a highly respectable, extremely popular and successful group of individuals, with a proven track record of success.

We also wish to apologise for any upset caused to local earrwigs, who may be alarmed at the prospect of having Robert Rams in charge of their interests.

To the best of our knowledge, there was no cabinet reshuffle last night

Full details of the real Barnet Council cabinet and their roles and responsibilities can be found here

http://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=120

Lobby of Mill Hill ward Councillors regarding One Barnet Program

I have just returned from a lobby of Mill Hill ward Councillors at Mill Hill Library. Present from Barnet Council were councillors Khatri and Hart. Present for the lobby were nine local residents, most of whom I didn't know. It is worth making the point that both of these councillors are known to be sceptical about the program (or "to be convinced of some elements of it"). John Hart laid out the council position, which is that there is a funding crisis and something has to be done. The delegation stated that we don't believe a ten year outsourcing program, removing council control of services is appropriate. We cited the risks, quoted examples in Barnet and beyond, where such initiatives had failed and stated that the Association for Public Service Excellence had identified less risky methods of achieving savings.

The Councillors promised to report back to the leadership of the Borough, the concerns raised. Councillor Hart gave an eloquent description of how the decision making process works. He explained that once the Conservative group makes a decision, councillors are obliged to support it, even if they do not agree. The punishment for voting against proposals is removal of whip. Councillor Hart believes that he can do more within the party than outside.

Perhaps the most interesting thing to come from the meeting was John Hart's statement that Finchley & Golders Green MP, Mike Freer is the driving force behind One Barnet, despite having no official role in the council. The councillors made no attempt to explain how the program could deliver the savings that have been talked about or address the risks of the failure of the contracts or contractors racking up extra bills when in control of the services. They seemed concerned about the length of the contracts and acknowledged the risks of huge legal bills, which may well gobble up any notional savings.

It is pretty clear that many Conservative councillors support for One Barnet is based on the fact that they feel they have to do something and the ideology that private services do the job cheaper and better. Sadly the NSL parking contract shows that this is not necessarily true. This is a One Barnet contract that has already been let and is a million pounds in the red.

A couple of ladies who have experience of Your Choice Barnet, the LATC set up to provide care, gave some horrific examples of how badly trained or inappropriate staff supplied by this agency actually were. One carer had turned up when she was 8 months pregnant and informed the lady who required care that she was to tired to do anything!

Welcome to the brave new Barnet

Congratulations to Richard Cornelius on allowing Brian Coleman to keep his job

Brian Coleman has been in the news quite a lot recently. Let me tell you about a most interesting incident last night.

I was having a quiet drink with my wife, when Brian Coleman noticed us. He came down and sat with us and started engaging me in friendly conversation. He took time to show me his new Italian shoes and then stated that it was necessary for him to remain in his job because none of the rest of the Tories were up to the job. I was just about to ask him how he could possibly justify the incident with Helen Michael, when the alarm clock went off and I woke up.

I have spoken to six Conservative councillors in the since Thursday. All of them are people who I am on friendly terms with. All bar one were appalled by what has happened. As to the general populace of Barnet, the reaction has been even stronger. I have had emails from people who support Mr Coleman, but those were few and far between.

The Leader of the Council, Richard Cornelius today announced that no action would be taken against Mr Coleman. The Hendon Times reports it here

http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/topstories/9947150.Tory_leader___Coleman_innocent_until_proven_guilty_/?ref=twtrec

Mr Cornelius has given the opposition a gift. It is clear that he does not care about the image of Barnet Council or the fact that the reputation of the Barnet Conservative party is being dragged through the mud. Mr Cornelius clearly doesn't understand what "Innocent until proven guilty" means. If a murder is committed or a teacher at a Barnet school was accused of a crime against a child, the accused party would be suspended until such time as the case came to court and the facts established. We should not presume guilt, but we should most certainly take action to ensure that until such time as the facts have been established, the person who has been accused is taken out of the spotlight.

It is in no way saying Mr Coleman is guilty, to ask him to stand aside for the duration of the investigation. If he is cleared, then he can hold his head high. There is a precedent in Barnet Council. Last year, Councillor John Hart was accused of making a racist comment at a Hendon and District Area forum. Mr Hart was immediately removed from post. The standards committee later exhonourated Mr Hart. It seems extremely odd to me that Mr Hart was removed, whilst Mr Coleman is left in place.

As someone who writes a blog and would like to see the Conservatives voted out in 2014, Mr Cornelius has done me a big favour. Thank you Richard. I do wonder whether his Conservative colleagues will be quite so keen on his lack of leadership in relation to his out of control friend.

Clarification from Councillor Khatri regarding cancellation of Councillor Surgery

As this blog has mentioned on many occasions, most Conservative Councillors are decent and polite people, who don't wander the Borough looking to break peoples bones and insult them. Most don't send rude emails. In fact, most of them are quite nice if you bump into them in waitrose Car Park, Cafe Buzz or on Mill Hill Broadway. Most of them will be perfectly civil, if you send them an email, and most will send you a polite email if you get a fact wrong or need a clarification.

So itw as was that we have just received a clarification from Councillor Sury Khatri, regarding the cancellation of the Councillors surgery in Mill Hill on Saturday. The Barnet Eye stated that the surgery was cancelled due to the BAPS delegation attending. Councillor Khatri, who is a decent chap, emailed me to correct this. It was due to a clash of appointments for both himself and Councillor John Hart.

Here is the email, apologies to Cllr's Hart and Khatri for posting incorrect information. I hope this clears the matter up

------------------------
Dear Roger
Just catching up with events
I noted that there was to be a BAPS delegation to see us at our Councillor Surgery last Saturday and you reported that because of this we had cancelled it.
My reason for writing to you is that this is incorrect and wish to clear up any misunderstanding.
My sincere apologies as if we had known prior I would have informed that we would not be there.
As both Cllr John Hart and I had previous commitments for Saturday 22nd and neither one could be present I informed the Library of this on the previous Saturday 15th (after I finished my Councillor Surgery) and to put a note to this effect that we would not be holding a Councillor Surgery on Saturday 22nd - for your information message sent on Tuesday 18th to Mill Hill Librarian below
DEAR LIBRARIAN
APOLOGIES FOR SHORT NOTICE
THIS TO ADVISE YOU THAT, DUE TO OTHER COMMITMENTS, Cllrs KHATRI & HART WILL NOT BE HOLDING THE COUNCILLOR SURGERY THIS SATURDAY 22nd SEPTEMBER 2012.
PLEASE WOULD YOU PUT A NOTE TO THIS EFFECT AND ADVISE / APOLOGISE ON OUR BEHALF TO ANYONE WHO COMES TO SEE US AND THAT TO CONTACT US BY EMAIL / TEL


I DID ADVISE THE LIBRARIAN LAST SATURDAY OF THIS


Kind Regards
Cllr Sury N Khatri
Mill Hill Ward
------------------------------

Massive CPZ zone for Mill Hill announced for Saracens match day traffic - Update

Earlier this week, the Barnet Eye announced plans for a massive controlled parking zone, which will cover almost all of Mill Hill on match days and run for five  hours (1pm to 6pm) whilst rugby matches last under two hours - http://barneteye.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/saracens-cpz-zone-set-to-turn-mill-hill.html - a fairly big issue you may think. Sadly, the local press don't seem interested. Not a peep about the scheme from either paper. The Barnet Eye is a tadsurprised about the total lack of interest from our local papers. I believe the scheme will cause massive disruption for both businesses and resident.

I also emailed several local politicians including my MP, Matthew Offord, My GLA rep Andrew Dismore, my local councillors John Hart, Brian Schama and Sury Khatri, the leader of the council Richard Cornelius and the cabinet member for parking, Dean Cohen. I stated my objections to the scheme, made some positive suggestions, and asked to be consulted on the scheme. The only response I had was from Andrew Dismore, who agreed with my sentiments. From the rest of them? Not a peep. Not even a "thanks for the email".

What is even more interesting is when we actually look at where our councillors live. I f you look at the map of the area, lots of roads are marked in green as "past this point"  parking. I assume that these will have special restrictions for the match days. What is interesting is that two of the councillors live in the exclusion zone. It seems that neither of their roads have been shaded in in green. This is especially odd as the councillors road (Sherwood Drive) is less than 5 minutes walk from the entrance to Copthall from the Great North way.

When you consider that the councillors house is three times closer to the stadium than Parkside and perhaps four times closeer than Holders Hill Close, which is in the green area, one can only wonder ?

The whole bais for this scheme seems flawed to me. I fully accept that measures have to be taken to control parking, and I fully accept that the area will have to be a fairly large space, given that the stadium only has parking for 700 vehicles. Assuming that Saracens fill the 10,000 seat stadium, that will mean a lot of cars trying to park somewhere. I have no idea if this is true, but I've been told that 10,000 seats is more than all of the council car parking spaces in the London Borough of Barnet.

One avid reader made an excellent point. There is a derelict tube line running from Mill Hill East, directly to the Stadium. This line has long been highlighted as one that could easily and cheapely be reopened. Sponsors of the Brent Cross Light Rail scheme included the link in their plans. It would certainly ease travel problems if the spur was reopened for match days. As the track is already there, I can't believe that the costs would be too prohibitive. It would also be highly useful for people visiting Copthall Swimming pool and for pupils and staff of the local schools. It would also make it much easier for Mill Hill residents to access Finchley Memorial and Barnet General hospitals if the shuttle service was made a regular pattern. Sadly Saracens have expressed no interest in this scheme.

I am dismayed that there seems to be no interest in the matter at all from our MP. Mr Offord replied to me saying that he only looked at correspondence with my address on it. A lame excuse indeed, given that he knows me quite well.

I wish Saracens well for their plans at Copthall. The stadium did need developing and their plans will hopefully add much needed sports facilities for the Borough. The downside is that no thought at all has been givento traffic management. Given that Saracens have no association with Mill Hill, having been based in Watford, it is clear that most fans will drive to the stadium. One suspects that this will cause havoc and that Mill Hill residents will not forgive their Tory councillo9rs in 2014, when the fulle xtent of the mayhem has dawned on the residents. maybe that is why our councillors can't be bothered. they know they are doomed, so why bother?

Saracens CPZ zone set to turn Mill Hill into a wasteland !

Barnet Council have just released a map showing the extents of parking chaos and disruption which will be caused to Mill Hill by the arrival of Saracens at Barnet Copthall Stadium. The extent of the "match day CPZ" is humungous, extending on the western side from Mill Hill Broadway Station in Station Road, to the large viaduct on Dollis Road in the East. The most northerly point is Hartley Avenue (just off Mill Hill Broadway) and the the most southerly point is Church Road Finchley.

The zone operates from the 1pm to 6pm on match days and other times if match times vary. What this means is that most of Mill Hill's residents will not be able to have visitors on the days that Saracens are playing. For many working people, Saturdays are the prime time for visiting relatives. What about the effect on the shops in Mill Hill Broadway? The new CPZ will remove much of the parking for the Broadway on the Woodlands Way/Sylvan Avenue roads. After the abolition of Pay as You Go, this is yet another blow for traders.

I have to state a vested interest here. My business is in Bunns Lane Works, which is also included. Whilst on the face of it, this shouldn't affect us, as we have off street parking, given the size and extent of the zone, we may well suffer as inconsiderate car owners try and park on our properties.

The plan exposes the lies that were peddled that there is ample parking provision at the stadium. If this were true, then we wouldn't need this massive exclusion area. All along, Mill Hill residents have had suspicions that they have been taken for a ride. This is now proven by this map.

It is quite clear what will happen. As ever Barnet Council have not thought this through at all. Roads on the edge of the zone, with access to the 221 bus, which serves the stadium will be stuffed full of cars. The roads slightly nearer will be dead, with residents unable to have visitors. Businesses in Mill Hill Broadway, Mill Hill East, Salcolme Gardens etc will see a massive downturn in business.

The timings for the CPZ are truly idiotic and show just how out of touch Barnet Council are. The solution is so simple and obvious. If the time of the match is 3pm-5pm, make the exclusion zone from 3.30pm to 4.30pm. That way, Rugby traffic will not be able to park, as they will miss the match, but the rest of us will not be largely inconvenienced. How hard is that to figure out?

If you are a Mill Hill resident or a Mill Hill based business, please contact your local councillors ASAP and let them know what you think.

As I am sure you guessed, I will be.

Their email accounts are :
cllr.j.hart@barnet.gov.uk
cllr.s.Khatri@Barnet.gov.uk
Cllr.B.Schama@Barnet.gov.uk

The DPR giving details is here

http://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=4285

Here is the map

Saracens CPZ Map

Barnet Council sneak through plans for a new Highway through the heart of Mill Hill

As ever, if Barnet Council want to sneak through a highly contentious and divisive issue, they do it on the sly. Typically they will do this as a Delegated Powers Report, which doesn't require discussion by the Council, which is done by officers with no democratic discussion. Secondly, they will do it in the middle of August, when no one is looking. Thirdly they will give the DPR a very neutral name, which disguises the real meaning of what is being done.

So it is again this year. I happened to notice this DPR -  http://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=4259 - entitled "Highway Improvements to Bittacy Hill". Who could possibly think that such a DPR, signed off by Pam Wharfe, Interim director of Environment, Regeneration and Planning could possibly be in any way contentious? Nothing in there to worry about?

Think again. Behind the bland title, there is a huge scheme being implimented, by stealth and with no democratic debate or accountability. This scheme will effectively divide Mill Hill in two halfs and threaten a nature reserve. It will blight many homes and will have a huge effect on traffic levels through the Borough.

The real intention of what is being done is only mentioned briefly in section 8.3. It says

The proposed highway works will entail the reconstruction of the existing Bray Road access to the proposed development as part of the proposed East-West link road at its junction with Bittacy Hill

If you look carefully at the map associated with the plan, their is a big arrow at the edge of the development, directing traffic down Sanders Lane. If you look at Google, this road is shown as one long road. The road actually becomes a footpath, through a nature reserve shortly after Brownsea Walk. Barnet Council Highways department have long dreamed of making a highway from the Mill Hill East development, down Sanders Lane, into Tavistock Avenue, across Pursley Road, Down Ashley Walk, across Copthall Open Space and down to the A1, making a major intersection. This road would effectively divide Mill Hill and Mill East in two. Traffic would proliferate and huge numbers of homes, which are currently quiet roads in cul-de-sacs would become blighted by constant traffic.

The fact this is being snuck through is typical of the way Barnet Council operate. I will be writing to our local Councillors to insist they call this in and get the Highways department to explain their true intentions. I will also be notifying the Mill Hill Preservation Society and other local pressure groups.

If the council persist with this plan, I would suggest that this would spell the end of the Conservatives in Mill Hill and the end of Mill Hill as a nice place to live. I will publish the response from Councillors Hart, Schama and Khatri in due course. I will also be emailing Councillor Brian Coleman and Dean Cohen. I wish to know the true intentions of the Council in this respect and I suspect only Brian Coleman really knows. Finally, I will be emailing Pam Wharfe for the full details of the plan. As ever, nothing surprises me with Barnet Council. The Email to Ms Wharfe will be under the auspices of a Freedom of Information request.

1742 - Highway Improvements at Bittacy Hill


Map Bray Road

Barnet Council Tories - Men Behaving Badly !

The Barnet Eye was lucky enough to video some of last night's council meeting. Some of the footage was truly astonishing. I personally thanked Councillor Hart for his efforts to make the blogs more interesting !

You can see Robert Rams loose the plot, Tom "Mummys boy" Davey be truly obnoxious, Councillor Dean Cohen give us a master class in public speaking and Robert Rams give us a perfect display of bad manners and getting caught out !


 It would be quite funny if the issues the were discussing didn't involve a billion pounds of our money, our young people's education, parking policies which determine the success of our High Streets, the provision of services to people on low wages and benefits and the provision of care for the elderly and disadvantaged members of our community.

I challenge anyone of any political persuasion to persuade me that the footage here would instill confidence in the stewardship of the council by the Conservative Party in Barnet. Sadly for many disadvantaged in Barnet, the only thing this bunch are prepared to give them is an ironic laugh.

Barnet Council General meeting : Dancers at the end of time?

What a strange spectacle we have in the Barnet Council Town Hall. I gave American film director Charles Honderick a lift back to the station (via the pub and kebab house) after the Council meeting tonight. He had been filming some footage for a follow up he's making to "A Tale of Two Barnets". Charles thinks that an addendum of possibly a full follow up is justified given the changes that have happened in Barnet since January when he finished filming. Brian Coleman lost the GLA, Friern Library shut, the Tories have backed off on parking charges. 

Charles attended his first full council meeting tonight. His verdict "Nothing like that could possibly happen in the USA". Charles added "I felt like I'd watched a fight". He also gave his verdict on some of the councillors. 

Tom Davey, who stated that the council wouldn't help people who wouldn't help themselves "Doesn't he realise how that sounds in the gallery, some people can't".

John Hart, Who took great delight in quoting an expletive from Tony Crossland during a debate on education "What was that all about, did he just say that to shock everyone".

Dean Cohen, who floundered badly when answering questions about parking "They mentioned his Dad was a councillor, was he appointed because of nepotism?"

Robert Rams "He completely lost the plot at one point (during the debate on One Barnet), he didn't seem to know what he was saying and turned bright purple". 

Jack Cohen "When he started speaking I thought he was a bumbling fool, but by the end, the hall was silent and no one could argue with his conclusions". 

The Mayor, Brian Schama and the ceremony when he entered the room and had his rabbi say a prayer "In the USA, that would be illegal. Why do they dress up like that for a simple council meeting to discuss mending the roads".

Brian Coleman "He picked his nose, scratched his head and generally looked bored the whole night, apart from when he was looking grumpy".

And then there was the special guest star, Barnet Traders Spokesperson Helen Michael "When Helen walked in, it was like the star arrived. She was funny and to the point. She should be leader of the Council".

Charles was particularly shocked by the fact thatb (Tory) councillors seemed to hold the public in contempt. In the USA there is the perception that the voter is king. In Barnet the public gallery was talked down to and ignored. 

And what did the public gallery do? 

Rather strangely, the public gallery of Barnet Council was like a Glasgow music hall audience. They gave the councillors who spoke well respect. For instance, not a single peep was uttered when Lib Dem Jack Cohen spoke, even though most of the audience probably despise the Lib Dems for joining with the Tories. They recognise that Jack is a class act. I doubt there is anyone in Barnet who would like to see Jack go, despite their misgivings about the coalition. Councillors Davey, Cohen and Rams were given short shrift. Davey causing uproar for his callousness and lack of compassion. Rams causing uproar for his inability to string more than three words together coherently. He started waffling about referendums and even Brian Coleman visibly rolled his eyes.

Perhaps the most interesting thing was what happened outside the council chamber. I went out for a comfort break, to see Unison Leader John Burgess, Rabbi Newman and Brian Coleman deep in sensible conversation about the failings of One Barnet. Several other conversations were witnessed, which makes me think that despite the public utterings of the administration, they want a way to get out with their dignity intact. I wonder if Coleman sees principled opposition to One Barnet as his redemption with the Barnet voters? Whatever his sins, Coleman is no fool and must realise the damage One Barnet is causing. If it was canned tomorrow, that would give Barnet Council £10 million to play with.  What sane politician would look that gift horse in the mouth? 

After the meeting, we all adjourned to the Greyhound pub. Given that nothing had actually been achieved, the mood amongst Barnet activists and Barnet Labour councillors was bizzarely triumphal. We detect a change in the air. 

Watch this space for the video footage.

Brian Coleman induced parking mayhem spreads across Barnet

Earlier in the week, we learned that Councillor Brian Colemans decision to abolish free parking bays last year had caused mayem on Bittacy Hill. Buses were held up, the Police had got involved, local residents were inconvenienced and traffic flow was impaired. As parking restrictions are designed to "improve traffic flow", it is clear that Coleman has produced a policy which doesn't work. Not only that, it may be illegal, as it is clearly a revenue raising move (yet another Colemanite Stealth tax).

It appears that Bittacy Hill is not the only place in Barnet to be under the "Coleman Cosh". The Barnet Eye today learned that Bunns Lane in Mill Hill is also suffering. As with the Bittacy Hill cock up, Barnet Council have tried to bury the bad news, by releasing the information as an officer released DPR. Clearly Brian Coleman wants no association with the failure of his policy to be associated with him, in the run up to the GLA elections.

Here is a link to the report
http://committeepapers.barnet.gov.uk/democracy/reports/reportdetail.asp?ReportID=11121

And here is what its says Colemans policies have done to traffic in Bunns Lane Mill Hill.

8. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

8.1 

Bunns Lane/Grahame Park Way NW7

In June 2011 the Council completed a scheme whereby all ‘Free’ parking bays

were converted to permit holder or paid for parking bays in the borough’s Controlled
Parking Zones (CPZs). Subsequent to the changes being made to the Mill Hill CPZ,
Councillor Rayner and TFL have reported that an increased level of parking is
occurring on both sides of Bunns Lane between the junction of Woodcroft Avenue
and the mini roundabout at the junction with Grahame Park Way which is just
outside of the CPZ boundary.

8.2 Bunns Lane has seen an increase in parking activity since the removal of the free

bays in the adjoining CPZ by motorists, suspected to be commuters using the local
transport links parking their vehicles throughout the day. Motorists are parking as
close as possible to the current restrictions which is causing obstruction for larger
vehicles including buses and commercial vehicles resulting in an increase in

congestion along this section of Bunns Lane. A site visit by Officers and Councillor

Rayner confirmed that obstructive parking is detrimental to traffic flow.

8.3 As a result of these observations, it is intended to propose and implement ‘At Any

Time’ waiting restrictions in lengths of Bunns Lane and Grahame Park Way, in
order to improve traffic flow along these stretches of road:

8.4 In addition, it is also proposed to extend the existing Monday to Saturday 8am to

6.30pm waiting restrictions in Bunns Lane for a short length. The proposal is
shown on the drawing 21729/744 appended to this report.

8.5 Councillor Rayner has since reaffirmed his views and support for the proposals. In

particular, Councillor Rayner advised of his concerns regarding safety being an
issue at this location.

8.6 All Hale Ward and Mill Hill Ward Members have been consulted on the proposals

Councillor Sury Khatri has confirmed his support for the measures.
As one may have come to expect from our useless and cowardly Mill Hill and Hale Ward Tory Councillors, there has been no attempt to stand up for the hard pressed commuters of Mill Hill, who resnet being stung by extortionate car packing charges at Mill Hill Broadway Station car park. These were hiked to £5 a day last year. Who can blame ordinary working people for wishing to try and avoid such daylight robbery. There is no mention from them that prior to Brian Colemans cash grabbing abolition of Free bays, this wasn't a problem. There is no mention of the fact that there is widespread opposition to the CPZ parking hikes.

Section 8.6 gives  the game away. Of six councillors informed of the changes affecting their ward, only one Sury Khatri appears to have bothered to respond. What does this tell us about the Conservative Councillors who now represent Mill Hill and Hale Ward. It strikes me as likely that the council planned to roll out these sort of sneaky parking restrictions across the Borough, under the radar as officer approved DPR's. I urge the opposition Labour and Lib Dem councillors to call all of these in for review to expose Colemans policies for the abject failure and cash grab, which everyone knows they are.

I stood for election in May 2010 for Mill Hill Ward. I lost out to the Conservatives. They get [paid thousands of pounds a year to represent the people of Mill Hill. This DPR lays bare just how useless and lazy they are. How hard is it to read your paperwork and let the Council know when the people you represent are being fleeced. Brian Coleman has materially damaged the infrastructure of Mill Hill, with his cash grabbing policies and our councillors are to scared of him to say a dickie bird about it. Shame on all of them. As to the Hale Councillors, they are even more useless. Tome Davey is on the Cabinet and has waved all of these Tax the motorist policies through, stopping only to abuse people on benefits at every opportunity. Councillor Hugh Rayner is the chairman of the Local Conservative Party and so is clearly hand in glove with Coleman and his grab your cash policies. As to the other Hale Councillor, he's so useless, I can't even remember his name. Maybe he's the invisible man. Maybe he's a figment of Councillor Robert Rams imagination. If he's ever lifted a finger to stop the good people of Hale Ward being ripped off by Brian Coleman please feel free to add a comment, because he must have done it in secret.

The Barnet Eye will continue to fight to save the hard pressed families and commuters of Mill Hill from the cash grabbing excesses of Brian Coleman and his policies of Stealth taxation. It seems that in Mill Hill, you only see Tory Councillors when they want your vote. You will find the Barnet Eye here 365 days a year fighting for you. Enjoy your Easter

Here is the full document for your perusal
1604 - Introduction of Waiting Restrictions

Official document prove Brian Colemans parking policies are a disaster

Have you noticed how people in Barnet seem to be parking their cars in the strangest places, how congestion has got worse recently, how roads which previously were quiet are now awash with cars during the daY?

Last July Councillor Brian Coleman sneaked through a whole raft of changes to Parking restrictions in Barnet. He is well known for his stealth tax his parking policies. The five main ones, which have affected just about everyone are as follows :-

1) Hiking up parking charges on High Streets and car parks, driving away customers and shutting shops
2) Aboloshing pay and display parking on High Streets
3) Hiking up the price of Resident CPZ permits
4) Abolition of "free bays" in Resident CPZ parking zones
5) Outsourcing the parking warden contract to a company with a reputation for overzealous enforcement

All of these measures are designed to do one thing. Squeeze more money out of motorists and residents. Sadly for Brian Coleman (and the rest of us), not only have these policies failed miserably in their target of raising extra cash ( rumour has it that the parking account is down by £500,000 as people shun council car parks). As people have sought free spaces outside of the restrictions, roads have become clogged, congestion has risen and residents have been inconvenienced.

Given that the sole purpose of parking restrictions is to "ease the flow of traffic", this means that the policy has not only been an abject failure, but it is probably illegal. Coleman cannot claim that the policy is to ease traffic flow, because papers published on the Council website prove this is not the case. The Barnet Eye suggests that a judicial review should be performed of Colemans policies and in the meantime they should be reversed. The complete failure of Colemans policies are laid bare in this document on the Barnet Council website -
http://committeepapers.barnet.gov.uk/democracy/reports/reportdetail.asp?ReportID=11110

Let me quote the document :-

8. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

8.1 In June 2011 the Council completed a scheme whereby all ‘Free’ parking bays were converted to permit holder or paid for parking bays in the borough’s Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs). As a result of the changes made to the Mill Hill East CPZ, a proportionate level of displaced parking is occurring on both sides of Bittacy Hill on the outskirts of the CPZ boundary.

8.2 The council has been contacted by roads users and local residents, complaining of the congestion being caused as through vehicles are being obstructed by the displaced parking.

8.3 London Buses have reported to the council that the displaced parking is obscuring sightlines and obstructing through traffic, preventing their buses from gaining suitable access through the road, resulting in the delay of their services. They also stated that this situation has caused major congestion in both directions on Bittacy Hill and therefore, have had to temporarily put some of their buses on diversion.

8.4 In addition, the Police have also expressed concerns regarding this location, and have requested for waiting restrictions to be introduced.

8.5 Following investigations including site observations, Officers concluded that major congestion occurs on the hill at this location, and in order to keep traffic movingthrough the borough considered that the provision of waiting restrictions would be appropriate given the obstructive parking which is taking place.

8.6 Therefore, proposals to introduce lengths of ‘at any time’ waiting restrictions on certain lengths of Bittacy Hill including around its junctions with Bittacy Close and Engle Park, were designed in order to deter obstructive parking and improve traffic flow, sightlines and safety.

8.7 In anticipation of the statutory consultation, Mill Hill Ward Members were consulted on the proposals with all advising of their agreement and support of the measures for the area. In particular, Councillors Khatri and Hart stated that they had also received complaints on this matter or have experienced problems themselves. Councillor Hart did raise the issue that more restrictions may cause more problems to the wider area as did Councillor Schama.

8.8 However, Officers consider that any displaced parking that may occur as a result of the introduction of the restrictions can be absorbed into the local network with
minimal impact.

8.9 In mid August it was necessary to introduce emergency temporary waiting restrictions on the eastern side of Bittacy Hill, as nearby Devonshire Road was closed to allow for essential maintenance works to take place, which resulted in an increased traffic flow on Bittacy Hill that exasperated the problems occurring at the location.

8.9 Traffic cones were placed on street to indicate the temporary waiting restrictions, and the location was monitored by Officers. Observations showed that displaced parking was minimal and what did occur had little impact on the area. It was concluded that the removal of the parked vehicles at this location was very effective in relieving the congestion normally experienced.

8.10 Additional supporting evidence underlining the concern via photographs showing buses being obstructed and the congestion experienced were sent to the council and a petition signed by all residents of Bittacy Close was also submitted, asking for waiting restrictions to be implemented at the junction of Bittacy Close and Bittacy Hill.

8.14 Councillor Khatri and Councillor Hart have since also reaffirmed their views and support for the proposals. In particular, they advised of their concerns regarding safety being an issue at this location. Councillor Hart also re-iterated his concerns for residents of Bittacy Close, who suffer from obstruction at the junction of Bittacy Close and Bittacy Hill.

Here is the full document for your perusal.

Bittacy Hill Parking restrictions

This document lays bare the failure of the parking policies of Brian Coleman. It exposes the fact that rather than easing traffic flow, they are creating mayhem, tying up Police resources, ruining the lives of residents, making buses late and worst of all threatening public safety. In short Brian Coleman and his polices have been thoroughly discredited. Even worse is the fact that rather than admit that Colemans policies are to blame, the lame Mill Hill Conservative Councillors have buried their heads in the sand and refused to address the real cause of the problem.

The Barnet Eye will today be contacting local press, local councillors and the Leadership of Barnet Council to demand a full review of the disaster which Brian Coleman has inflicted on the London Borough of Barnet. Is there anyone in Barnet who seriously thinks that Brian Coleman deserves re-election for a £52,000 a year part time job at the GLA in MAy? His level of competence is laid bare here.

Barnet Eye Special - Coppers with Choppers !

The theme for today is policing in Barnet. I try not to criticise the police too much, because they have a tough job. Last year I had a chat with the chief of police and he agreed that Barnet was probably the safest and most pleasant Borough to be in charge of. That doesn't mean that it doesn't have its challenges and issues. In fact Barnet has challenges because it is probably the most economically diverse Borough in the country. The issues for policing the leafy mansions of Totteridge, where gated mansions and private security firms aim to deter burlgars are completely different to issues facing those living in Grahame Park. I was having a chat with a less esteemed member of the constabulary over a pint and he said a very interesting thing. If a millionaire in Totteridge gets burgled and his house gets ransacked, he expects the chief of police to personally conduct the investigation. If a single mum in Grahame park gets burgled and her house gets ransacked, often she's amazed if anyone actually shows up. Even more interesting was his view that criminality pervades every level of society, it's just that those at the bottom of the pile are not as proficient at it and get caught.

He made the point that the crack addict who robs his local off license has a high chance of getting caught sooner or later and will probably end up in prison. The company director engaging in corporate fraud will most likely never get caught. It isn't just such financial crimes where the expectation of justice is so different. When it comes to issues of spousal abuse and wider sexual crimes, this isn't just the domain of the poor in the borough. The difference is that women in the higher levels of society also feel "shamed" and so are less likely to report. The likely remedy is likely to be financial in the form of a divorce settlement or some cash to "shut up and go away".

Then there is the issue of drugs. Is substance abuse less or more common in the towers of Totteridge or the crack dens of Colindale? As a percentage of the population, it is probably pretty similar. Again, there is probably a disconnect between what justice one could expect if caught. A working class person caught with drugs, will probably just accept the punishment, whatever that may be. For the more well heeled members of society, a bevvy of lawyers and implausable excuses will be deployed. The more well heeled, the more it costs the police to persue even the most trivial of issue.

We have a bit of a schizophrenic attitude to the police. Half the time (when we get a speeding ticket) we moan that "they haven't got anything better to do, but if a speeding driver runs over our child we say "why don't they do something". I discussed the seeming obsession with traffic offenses with the police and they pointed out that you are far more likely to get injured or killed by a speeding driver than be murdered or maimed by a maniac.

We all feel safer when we see bobbies on the beat. They add a general feeling of security to us. Last night, as I played football at Powerleague in Pursley Road, we had a Police helicopter hovering nearby for about 10 minutes. I've no idea what they were up to, maybe monitoring traffic on the M1 or A1 after and incident? To me Coppers in choppers always make me feel a tad uneasy. When I watch Police, Camera, Action ! type documentaries and they show helicopters stalking villains with night vision, it reminds me that the big brother society is moving ever closer. Helicopters are expensive toys, which I've never been entirely convinced deliver value for money.

One of my friends who is a policeman (with old school attitudes to crime) tells me that the big problem is not the police at all. It is the fact that criminals are not locked up quickly enough, for long enough or regularly enough. He tells me that in Barnet, most burglaries are caused by no more than a dozen people. To lock each one up costs a fortune and then they are released, with the police knowing full well that there will be a spike in burglary cases, almost immediately. Of all the crimes, burglary is the one which people feel the justice system is most out of kilter on (with the exception of paedophiles). The police tell me they take the issue seriously and can, with justification, claim that it is not their fault if the courts don't lock people up for long enough.

Last year we had the sad spectacle of a murder in a brothel in Burnt Oak. For many Barnet residents, this seemed like a window to another world. I doubt that many of our local politicans have ever ventured out into Burnt Oak for a night out. The delights of a  pint at the Bald Faced Stag on a Saturday night is a pleasure I cannot imagine Brian Coleman savouring. Sadly it is something I believe all of our politicians should do. Last year on the campaign trail in Mill Hill, I had a friendly chat with Tory Councillor John Hart. The subject of Burnt Oak and his colleagues came up. It may surprise you to hear me say it, but I think John is one of the very few Tories who recognise the value of Burnt Oak and its citizens. John told me he always buys his fruit and veg in Burnt Oak. He told me that the Tories should be courting the small traders who run the shops, the hard working Asian community and everyone else working to earn a crust. He told me that if Matthew Offord won in Hendon, it would be because he'd got out and about in Burnt Oak (at Johns suggestion apparently) and that the 2-300 votes he'd gained as a result of talking to people there may be the difference. As it turned out, Offord won by 106 votes. John was right and it "woz Burnt Oak which won it for Souperman".

It is interesting that in the midst of the riots last year, unlike many working class areas, Burnt Oak didn't see large scale rioting. I suspect that this is because there is a sense of community there. I believe that this is a lesson for the Metropolitan Police in all of this. It is easy to retreat to our bunkers when cash is tight. There is a tendency to return to the squad cars and the choppers to police the Borough. This would be a mistake. I believe that the opposite should be the policy. More engagement with the community and more efforts to get people to work with the police. As Matthew Offord won his seat in Burnt Oak, I'd like to see him start to champion the area and put himself at the forefront of efforts to build bridges between the community and the police. There is no easy solution to keeping Barnet safe. The most important thing is for the Police to ensure that ALL SECTIONS of society see the Police as part of the solution and not part of the problem. Last year I was talking to another friend who is a Met Police officer. We were discussing drug dealers. She said that she'd had to go and tell the mother of a 19 year old drug dealer that he'd been murdered. The mother was devastated, she felt it was her own fault for letting her son ever get involved in gangs and drugs. She said she wished she'd turned him in to the police, the first time she'd found him with drugs. Would you? Would I?


I hope to god it's a decision I never have to make and I never have to regret.