Parking Permits in Hillsborough.

[andygardener]

I offer the work to the guy who lives at No25 Smith St. Someone who lives at no50 wants to know why I didn't offer them the opportunity in a fair and open procurement process (and my procurement team and the auditors will want to know too)

 

Explain to them that such a process would cost far more than the value of the contract and would have had to be passed on to them. Tell them the council values their views and this is the cheapest and most effective way of gathering them.

 

The person distributing the leaflets is attacked. My lawyers will be asking me what checks and safeguards I put in place to ensure that they were working safely

 

Ask the person would they feel safe carrying out the exercise when you hire them. Ask them to sign a waiver indemnifying the council of any responsibility for their safety in carrying out the survey, after all you're getting them to ask a simple question, not smuggle heroin or assassinate Bashar al Assad.

 

 

There are many more. Nothing is as simple as you might like it to be.

 

To do good public engagement needs substantial time and money. Luxuries which the Council staff involved don't often have.

 

I'm sure you could make up excuses not to genuinely consult residents all day long. But the reader sees them for what they are, bureaucratic excuses, not real reasons. The reason you don't have time and money to consult the people who pay your wages is because the way you do things is so wasteful and expensive, your above two comments are good examples of that.

[Planner1]

Any chance of answering my Question . ?

If you continue to ask me questions about things that don't exist, how can I answer?

 

---------- Post added 13-01-2013 at 18:01 ----------

 

I'm sure you could make up excuses not to genuinely consult residents all day long. But the reader sees them for what they are, bureaucratic excuses, not real reasons. The reason you don't have time and money to consult the people who pay your wages is because the way you do things is so wasteful and expensive, your above two comments are good examples of that.

 

People are genuinely consulted, each property in the area is letter dropped.

 

Councils are constrained by being publicly accountable for their decisions and actions, that means we have to follow the rules and document it all properly. That means time and money. You may view that as wasteful and expensive, but the people who make the rules (your elected representatives in central government) clearly don't.

[Penistone999]

If you continue to ask me questions about things that don't exist, how can I answer?

 

I call them speed scameras ,you call them cameras , but you know exactly what i mean . so any chance of answering the Question please .

 

Does the loophole allowing money from parking permits being to be used for other transport uses mean it can be used to install speed scameras. ?

[Planner1]

I call them speed scameras ,you call them cameras , but you know exactly what i mean . so any chance of answering the Question please .

 

Does the loophole allowing money from parking permits being to be used for other transport uses mean it can be used to install speed scameras. ?

The safety camera partnership tend to pay for those these days. As you know, that is a separate organisation.

[andygardener]

People are genuinely consulted, each property in the area is letter dropped.

 

Councils are constrained by being publicly accountable for their decisions and actions, that means we have to follow the rules and document it all properly. That means time and money. You may view that as wasteful and expensive, but the people who make the rules (your elected representatives in central government) clearly don't.

 

OK, but I've shown you a better way of doing it, which would cost much less and deliver vastly more accurate results.

 

You came up with some silly excuses which have been comprehensively rebuffed.

 

Are you saying to the forum that the way I suggested doing it is banned by central government and if so can you show evidence of this?

 

Because if it is I'll personally contact Eric Pickles and ask him why this is the case and request it be changed. I suspect he'll be very happy to help you to overcome your perceived problem.

[matsalleh]

So the fact that in some cases the 'ballot' took place when most of the properties were empty and therefore the residents of those properties had no chance to respond is fair?

 

I know of a street where 100% of responses were against it - okay it was only 1 out of 30 , but no-one else said they responded when asked - but that was ignored by the council.

 

The council also cannot back up any of their statistics with absolute data - I have asked under a FoI request.

 

So all in all, it shows the council will do what they want DESPITE the residents' wishes.

I have followed this thread from the beginning and apart of the bull was to provide spaces for shoppers.So when are the they coming?Monday to Friday on the stree I live there will be 6 or 7 cars from10 am to 4pm and 4 of them will be residents.From 6.30 onwards it will be almost full. IIRC the figures of the polls in Sharrow and Hillsborough were both bteween 50 &52% for permits.Hardly a large majority but a strange coincidence a cynical person might think.Not me of course as I have never had any trust and faith in most politicians for the last 40 years.

[Planner1]

OK, but I've shown you a better way of doing it, which would cost much less and deliver vastly more accurate results.

 

You came up with some silly excuses which have been comprehensively rebuffed.

 

Are you saying to the forum that the way I suggested doing it is banned by central government and if so can you show evidence of this?

 

Because if it is I'll personally contact Eric Pickles and ask him why this is the case and request it be changed. I suspect he'll be very happy to help you to overcome your perceived problem.

No you haven't. You have suggested an alternative and I have highlighted some of the many issues with your suggestion.

 

I've also highlighted that some of the processes you regard as wasteful and beaurocratic are there precisely because government (on your behalf) requires Councils to be open, transparent and follow procurement rules.

[andygardener]

No you haven't. You have suggested an alternative and I have highlighted some of the many issues with your suggestion.

 

I've also highlighted that some of the processes you regard as wasteful and beaurocratic are there precisely because government (on your behalf) requires Councils to be open, transparent and follow procurement rules.

 

So you have procurement rules that would stop you spending between £30 and £80 on something vastly more effective than what you currently spend hundreds on to get 1% response rates? Really, what are they then? Show me the rules, because as you say you are required to open and transparent so I'm sure they must be online.

[Kevo]

Planner 1 if you had just one objection to the parking scheme then it's wrong to implement it surely as how unfair is it to say to someone that they have to pay for a permit etc that they don't want it in the first place.so what your saying if the vote would have been 50 for it and 49 against the council would implement it???? .its like on here it seams to me that the vast majority are against it so lets kick it out now and bring back free parking.

[Planner1]

So you have procurement rules that would stop you spending between £30 and £80 on something vastly more effective than what you currently spend hundreds on to get 1% response rates? Really, what are they then? Show me the rules, because as you say you are required to open and transparent so I'm sure they must be online.

 

Vastly more efficient in your view. Where's the evidence?

 

---------- Post added 13-01-2013 at 18:57 ----------

 

Planner 1 if you had just one objection to the parking scheme then it's wrong to implement it surely as how unfair is it to say to someone that they have to pay for a permit etc that they don't want it in the first place.so what your saying if the vote would have been 50 for it and 49 against the council would implement it???? .its like on here it seams to me that the vast majority are against it so lets kick it out now and bring back free parking.

Ballots have been held on streets which were consulted on permit schemes and returned high levels of objections. Those were on a majority wins basis and that was clearly spelled out.

 

You will never please all of the people all of the time, so if you didn't implement something because 1 person objected, nothing and I mean nothing, would ever be done. There are very few measures which can be implemented which meet with universal approval.

 

There are quite a few people on here who say they like the permit schemes. However, much as I like hearing people's views on here, it's difficult to take an internet forum as being representative of a particular area, because you do not know who is posting.