Southwark's (lack of) Consultation process: eg CPZ; Speed limits; Restricted parking; Cycling etc

[hopskip]

I am starting this thread as there are quite a few threads here (on different topics) that all have a common theme.

What is Southwark's consultation process?

In my recent experience, it looks a shambles and a licence to act regardless of local feedback.

Are Southwark conducting consultations as we might want and reasonably expect; how many people become aware of a consultation before decisions are taken by Southwark and underway; what is the role of our Councillors in providing feedback or are they whipped into the opinion of the Cabinet leaders; do we trust what Councillors say regarding consultations and how visible is their feedback to Southwark; what is a strategic decision vs a normal decision and what are the implications?

I am sure there are many more questions that will emerge from the basic question: 'What is the Southwark consultation process?'

I have been drawn into the Townley Rd junction and Cycling/Quietways 'consultations' but might never have know about them. I can now see many other threads on EDF where very similar debates about the consultation process are taking place.

I have started this thread to create some awareness around how the consultation process in Southwark IS working now (or not as the reality check may show) so that our Councillors and Southwark understand what makes a transparent and responsible local government that we trust.

[@Woodwarde]

Let?s start at the very beginning..

Southwark list their consultations here:

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200024/consultations

"You can help influence decisions the council makes. Submit your comments on consultations and can get involved with the developments happening in Southwark. Various consultations, petitions and surveys are carried out throughout the year by Southwark Council. This is your borough so have your say on the issues that matter most to you by going to Petitions or Current".

On the link, the selection list includes 3 groups:

1. Closed

This lists consultations that have ended but there is quite varied content and it does not include the original consultation document(s) and associated responses. There does seem to be a record of final policies/outcomes. It is not obvious how to trace back to the timing of the original consultations.

2. Current

You would expect this to be the list of ?current? consultations. A quick look at them shows that most are in fact closed. However, the closed ones do still seem to be the original consultation documents but no longer say when the consultation started or finished. There are also a few that seem to be 'open' but give no indication of their start and end dates for input.

3. Petitions

Surprisingly, there is a spot for epetitions but it has only 2 or 3 petitions over a 2-3 year period and does not explain how the input from such petitions (or any other petition site) may work.

As a starting place on the Southwark website, should you manage to find it at all, it is extremely basic and does not describe how Consultations at Southwark work.

[JDR]

The consultations I've come across were generally by accident, promoted via social media by totally non council related interested parties.

I'd like to know how Southwark identify and communicate with groups "with vested interest" or by location? The Peckham Rye station original consultation was a farce. Only stopped because hundreds turned up to the council meeting and residents put together a very short notice deputation ( actually very complex and designed to make you not bother, 6 people need to nominate someone to represent them and be present). The system seems to be designed by council officials for council officials. Flawed doesn't cover it, it certainly doesn't seem to have residents, both residential and business, at its heart. More what the councillors think they can get away with

[Penguin68]

More what the councillors think they can get away with

Considering the surprise often evidenced by the councillors who post on this forum, I suspect it is what the council officials think they can get away with (possibly a specific cabinet member as well in some cases).

[first mate]

I don't really understand the territory but if certain policies are "strategic and borough wide" is there any way to object to/ overturn them? What is the process? There is a sense in certain posts that because it's "strategic" it is inevitable.

[spider69]

Penquin68 wrote

"More what the councillors think they can get away with

Considering the surprise often evidenced by the councillors who post on this forum, I suspect it is what the council officials think they can get away with (possibly a specific cabinet member as well in some cases)."

Below is the minutes for the 20 mph situation, democracy at work.

Total consultancy replies 7 against, 2 for motion carried

Full report can be found on Cllrs thread posted by bluecanary

Item No. Classification:

Open

Date:

9 July 2014

Decision taker:

Cabinet Member for

Regeneration Planning and

Transport

Report title: Determination of Statutory Objections Relating to the

Proposal to Introduce a Borough-wide 20mph Speed

Limit.

Ward(s) or groups

affected:

All

From: Strategic Director of Environment and Leisure

RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended that the Cabinet Member for Regeneration Planning and Transport:

1. Considers the seven objections and two supporting responses made in relation

to the proposed order to make Southwark a 20mph borough;

2. Reject the seven objections;

3. Instruct officers to make the relevant traffic orders; and

4. Instruct officers to write to the objectors to inform them of the council?s decision

with the responses set out in paragraph 17 of this report.

[first mate]

There is a document that precedes this one, that states that a period of consultation should include interested parties, like cyclist groups and Southwark Living Streets ( the latter is documented in favour of the 20 mph plan) but also local residents.

Why has a charity like Southwark Living Streets ( see www.southwarklivingstreets.org.uk) been given a voice when, apparently, local residents have not.

I would like to know where is the evidence for consultation with local residents? Has the Council truly followed process or simply stated that it has?

[panda boy]

The same council consultation (or lack of) 'tactics' are being employed in their plans to re-develop Camberwell Old and Camberwell New cemeteries.

Proposed plans released to the public at the start of December, offering 3 public 2 hour 'exhibitions' within 10 days of releasing the plans.

They have stated; "The burial strategy was consulted on extensively in 2011 and 2012". Further investigation reveals that the majority of local residents were in fact NOT consulted during this period. I hesitate to call this a lie despite it being the very definition of the word.

Under protest they have offered a public meeting about the plans on the 11th February.

One councillor has offered an impromptu meeting this weekend, which I applaud, but again the lack of notice means many concerned people will not be able to attend, again limiting our right to reply.

There appears to be no framework or structure to allow people to co-ordinate a response to the council.

Also, and rather telling, during one conversation with a councillor about this, they implied that "if people don't express a negative opinion, then it means they are in favour of the plans".

Apart from being rather twisted logic, it is disingenuous in the extreme. Reducing and limiting the opportunities for peoples right to reply to council plans appears to be part of their planning strategy.

Rather cynical and shameful in my opinion.

[first mate]

Yes, which is is why when the "free parking" consultation's opening weasel- worded question is "Do you support the principle of free parking, yes or no ?" We see how easily either answer can be used to support changing unrestricted parking to restricted.

I really am beginning to feel that councillors of any hue take us for fools. What can be done to stop the various issues listed in this thread?

[Tessmo]

Three things worry me about Southwark?s recent consultations.

The first is that the online ones seem to be open to everyone ? not just those living in Southwark. I?m thinking particularly of the Cycling Strategy map where you could pin up little comments. You had to register with a username and email address, but you could have answered from anywhere ? Glasgow, Cardiff, New York. Does that really count as ?consultation?? What value does Southwark Council put on the responses?

The second is how the word ?consultation? is qualified all the time. When the consultation on the changes to the Townley Road junction first started ? with the glossy brochure and map and online form ? it all seemed quite official. Recently, it has been described as ?informal? (like some kind of chatty social gathering), and we discover that there?s another stage, which is ?statutory? (when they put laminated notices written in teeny weeny writing on lampposts). All this probably makes sense to those on the inside. But for everyone else it?s confusing. There should be published guidelines on the council website, with standard terms, so that we all know where we are.

The third is how special groups of people get involved in the inner circle. (JDR brought this up, and I agree.) Who decides which groups count? Are there rules? Can anyone join in?

[panda boy]

Very good points Tessmo.

Is there any information on how the council actually use the responses they receive in these 'consultations'?

They surely have to have some kind of formal 'mission statement' (or similarly corporate bilge phrase) which qualifies how they use and react to these 'consultations'?

[Blah Blah]

Did the 20mpr thing really get passed on the back of just 9 replies to a consultation? How many people live in Southwark and use the roads? I'm speechless!

[@Woodwarde]

That is why I think a good place to start to see just how poor this is, is the Southwark website itself. I described in my first post what I can find and the 'list' of Open/Closed/Petitions. There's no information provided about Southwark policies & guidelines for conducting consultations - or at least anything that I have found in the public domain. I do have something in email form from a southwark planner, that I will try to dig out later.

Take a look at the Southwark website and see what you make of the background provided on these Consultations and then try to trace how they explained the context; advised what methods could be used to reply; advised whether there would be multiple stages to the consultation or not; or whether there are any priorities given to any particular groups and if so why; how will the responses be assessed and communicated? For those closed consultations - what happens to the results and visibility of the responses to issues raised?

And given that Southwark point to their website as their stock reply to concerns raised about how they communicated broadly on proposals - is it any wonder that we are experiencing such problems?

How can 9 responses be the basis upon which Southwark consider that they have raised awareness of an issue?

It will be interesting to hear more of our experiences on this thread and to see what pattern is emerging. So many questions......

[bluecanary]

How different things are when we are positively courted for our opinions, mailings hand delivered, personal visits, hands shook, babies kissed and dogs petted - all for an x on that all important form!

[Charles Notice]

If bluecanary had not found and bought the 20 mph consultation to our attention would we have ever known

I cannot recall throughout the recent thread any Cllr actually bring this to our attention regarding how it was passed.

Why?

[first mate]

Here's an interesting link to a map https://southwarklivingstreets.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/jtp-06nov14.ppt you need to scroll down about 15 sections.

This is taken from the Southwark Living Streets map showing state of progress for 20 mph in London boroughs. SLS is one of the bodies consulted and therefore fulfilling Southwark's legal obligation to consult with interested parties. It would be interesting to find out at what point in the "process" they were consulted and how this was done.

Here us one example of a consultation between this group and a consultation with Southwark on a variety if issues including 20 mph in Camberwell http://www.southwark.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/8813/3d_-_streets_-_living_streets_response

Does anyone recall tbese http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s38770/Lordship%20Lane%2020mph%20zone%20proposal.pdf

http://moderngov.southwarksites.com/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?Id=4154

[bluecanary]

first mate your third link is for the decision details on East Dulwich Grove 20mph, Road Safety and Traffic Calming Proposals. At the very end of the accompanying documents is a list of addresses that were consulted. Not been able to find anything similar for Lordship Lane although did find the public notice and traffic management order

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/9989/introduction_of_borough-wide_20_mph_speed_limit_-_public_notice_dated_27_february_2014

[bluecanary]

Scanning the QR code takes us to http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/2558/traffic_orders where there are various notices including some concerning removal/introduction of parking restrictions.

[Tessmo]

Am I right that local councillors are really important when it comes to consultations? It's obviously not OK for Southwark just to put stuff up on its website and expect people to see it. And I don't think Southwark can leaflet every house (although it could do a better job of sending consultation documents to the residents/businesses directly affected by new proposals). Not everyone's online, so emails/social media won't solve the problem, and not everyone reads newspapers either. So the only thing left is for ward councillors to make sure they pass on news about consultations by whatever method works best. Does this happen? Or don't councillors have the budget for it?

[kford]

The ambiguous parking question was a shocker. Talk about leading the witness.

[first mate]

Hi blue canary,

I think the second link I posted is the one for Lordship Lane, it documents objections too.

[Burbage]

bluecanary Wrote:

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

> ................Not been able to find

> anything similar for Lordship Lane although did

> find the public notice and traffic management

> order

>

And you wouldn't expect to. Lordship Lane is managed by TfL and thus excluded, as it says in section 2 of the order you link to. If TfL are required, or minded, to consult they will usually do so independently of the council.

[first mate]

Please see http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s38770/Lordship%20Lane%2020mph%20zone%20proposal.pdf

[Burbage]

first mate Wrote:

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

> Please see

> http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s38770

> /Lordship%20Lane%2020mph%20zone%20proposal.pdf

Right you are, sorry.

[bluecanary]

Thanks first mate but I continue to seek documented proof that consultation letters were delivered to the local community.