Rob Shorrock

Well according to a certain 'Independent' candidate they shouldn't be. I had a strange conversation with one of them last last week after he contacted me to proclaim that he found some of the stuff on this site 'offensive'. The bits he found offensive included reproducing one of their leaflets (he was not one of the candidates on this leaflet, which highlights the fact that they are operating on a political slate and are not genuine independents). Why this was a problem was never really elucidated.

The most beguling part of the exchange was his position that you should not offer the electorate anything - no manifesto or programme for government. You offer just yourself and a promise to listen and do what your constituents want. When I asked him if that included absolutely anything he couldn't answer. And of course, local elections are nothing to do with politics!

The palpable and perhaps most depressing part of this discussion was the utter lack of ambition. When I was trying to explain why Labour stands with a manifesto and a radical programme of change he felt this was far too grandiose for a 'bog standard councillor'. It was a clear that he did not see himself as an agent of change but more of an advocate and cipher - representation reduced to passing messages within the existing system. Another Independent that wants to get elected to change nothing.

A lot of money for something that doesn't work. A possible verdict on the SKDC communications strategy?

The public appraisal of the strategy has been buried in the BVPI residents survey, which shows some improvement on waste collection etc but not in the area of communications. This is a problem for the Tories as they made this one of their key priorities for last year and poured a lot of money into it. It also telling that the press release on the website includes a link to a full copy of the survey results. Press it and you will be sucked into the labyrinth of the local democracy website, to wander with growing frustration around the committee papers. Only the most assiduous explorer will be able to locate. Save yourself the trouble and go to the link here.

In a nutshell, 50% of residents feel that they are not informed about what the council is doing and only 18.7% were satisfied with opportunities to participate in local decisionmaking. 53.7% felt that they had no influence over decisions affecting their local area. Why was none of this included in the press release?

The cabinet is reviewing its strategy. As part of this they should reconsider their opposition to ward budgets and local forums controlled by neighbourhoods and transform the communications strategy to include engagement as key element.

Last night I spoke to a meeting of residents from Shaw Rd and Larch Close about registering  some green land in the area as a town or village green. They have galvanised themselves into a well organised and media savvy campaign, ever since the council announced its intention to build affordable housing on two sites bang on top of  these areas of green land.

 Over Easter, the Commons Act 2006 came into force which gives local communties greater powers to register land to which they have had free and unhindered access for recreation and pastimes for at least 20 years. Previously, all a landowner needed to do was to stick a sign up saying private property, and they could dispose of the land as they wanted even if people had been using it freely for years beforhand. Not any more. As long as it has been used continously by the community for over 20 years they have the right to register it as common land and save it from development.

The common lands of Larch Close and Shaw Rd are a classic example. The green areas appear to have been significantly and consistently used and the campiagners are gathering evidence from everyone they can find about how they use the green. In particular, they are getting evidence from people who have lived in the area for more than 20 years and children who will be most severely affected if this land disappears.

It is all coming together really well and an application is likely to be made shortly to the local authority. It is a powerful tool for communities to influence and shape their environments. They are likely to face opposition in some quarters and criticised for trying to stop much needed affordable housing. The campaigners recognise this and are keen to point out that they are not against the development of affordable housing (many of the talk about the problems that their own children are having in finding housing), but housing development needs to come with the facilities that make communities - including public spaces.

Its always refreshing to go out on the stump talking to the people on the Earlesfield estate. Its early evening, and here in Kinoulton Court a bunch of kids are kicking a ball around; people are beginning to get back from work; some loud music is pumping from a flat on the far side of the court; a group of men are discussing the mechanical problems with a car that looks like it has seen better days. Everything is rather mellow and good natured and sublimely lit as the dusk begins to settle in. People are passing greetings to each other - even responding to me as I offer leaflets around.

And the issues they want to talk about are very local: Locks on doors; flytipping - a big issue here!; the fact that there is only one post box on the entire estate; a certain resentment about teenage mothers from some of the older generation. Quote of the day, "I think Tony Blair is on another planet.", which could inspire an episode of Dr Who!

The key thing, however, widely recognised is that Labour at a local level was the party that defended council housing. Not a single Independent involved themselves in the South Kesteven Defend Council Housing Campaign! It still causes rancour in some people when they think about what could have happened if the privitisation had gone ahead. And also there has been no sign of the other candidates!

Looking ahead to May 3rd, it is clear that the local Labour Party in Grantham, Stamford and Bourne is the only party offering a truly progressive and modern agenda. The Tories lack credibility in the district following their disasterous and expensive attempt to sell-off council housing. The current figure for payments to external consultants and agencies is at well over £430,000. This figure doesn't include the amount of officer time spent on this from the district council. We are raising this as a debate at Thursdays council meeting on accountability and value for money in selecting consultants.

The Tories have also let Grantham grind to a halt; trodden roughshod over a popular petition to stop a large pedestrianisation project in Stamford and continue to abuse power by picking the chairs of scrutiny panels that will hold them to account.

The Tory cabinet is stuffed full of people that are astonishingly inept in any understanding of modern culture let alone modern politics. As one member of the public put it me after he had tried to ask questions about a licensing matter: "I was treated like I was from another planet. I'm just a reasonable guy trying to run a business. Where do these people come from?"

The Independents are no better. After failing to make any significant impact as the second largest group in the council (excluding the Tory New Independents that are simply stooges to suggest that the real Tories are pluralistic) they offer the electorate nothing but more of the same total ineffectiveness they have displayed in council. They have no manifesto and no programme for government. Some are ex-labour members and councillors that are quick to retreat from the challenges and pressures of collective politics when the going gets tough and resort to desperate parochialism.

Grantham Labour are offering a superb programme for change that can be found here.

Our key messages for this election are:

We will fight to protect and improve Grantham Hospital

We have always been central in the fight to protect Grantham Hospital, to maintain a 24hr A&E service and to bring back all the health services needed for a growing town.

We will cut waste and improve services

We have led the way in exposing how the Tories waste your money.  We will ensure that money is spent on services not on management costs.

We will ensure a better housing deal

Labour led the fight against the Tories and Independents attempt to sell-off council housing We pledge to keep council housing with the council. We will also provide help for young people renting and buying in the private sector.

We will improve public travel

Unlike the Tories, we will keep a universal taxi voucher scheme and introduce a new community transport scheme.

We will get Grantham moving again

The Tories have allowed Grantham traffic to grind to a stand-still. We will make getting Grantham moving again one of our top priorities.

We will support our young people

We will provide funding to support projects designed and run by young people.

We will give more money to communities

We will give funds to each neighbourhood to be spent by local people on projects to improve their neighbourhoods.

Together we can make Grantham better

Nominations have just been published for the local elections. There are a lot of independent candidates standing in Grantham as part of organised campaign to challenge every seat.

As an advocate of providing more information and support to citizens to enable them to get involved in the process this has got to be a good thing. However, I have always been perplexed by the core messages independents put out, namely that the problem in politics is political parties and therefore as independents they have an innate ability to rise above the 'quarrels' and the 'bickering'. Political parties, they argue, result in representives having two masters - the party and the electorate, with the party having the greater power. This must mean that citizens are not properly represented.

The anti-political and anti-collectivist mantra is offered as a virtue. In fact it is nothing more than a rank deception of the electorate.

Independents never offer a full programme for what they would do if they are elected to office. At best they stand to change one or two issues; at worst they offer a vapid vision devoid of policy or specific action.

It is the latter which the independents in Grantham appear to fall into. The flyer dropped through my letter box from Bru ce Wells and Rob Hearmon is a case in point. True to form, it has all the usual messages about party politics holding back the development of the town. The catalyst for the 'loose federation' of independents (isn't bringing people together under one banner creating  a party?) they offer is the Grantham Hospital campaign, one in which all political parties in Grantham have been involved. In fact, the Labour Party have been involved in it the longest and were instrumental in setting it up.

In their leaflet they offer nothing. I read it twice to make sure I hadn't missed anything. There is not a single practical policy measure. Their get-out clause on this is to state that,"we are not promising anything we do not believe is acheivable. What we do promise is that we will listen to your concerns and do our best to deal with them." How they will go about doing this is in a democratic way is unclear.

It is worth noting that the independents are the second largest group in the council and yes they do caucus and operate as a political group. If they were able to form an administration what will it do? Effectively, they would have to form a set of policies after the election to implement as their programme. So the voters would have not had a chance to scrutinise these beforehand, hence the deception I referred to earlier. Or they would simply have to follow the previous administration and would be highly led by the officers of the council.

Politics in democratic societies is about debate and change. It is our duty to citizens to offer a programme which they can examine and question us about. In this the independents in Grantham have so far miserabley failed.