£90,000 well spent? Options

[Lolly]

To be fair, she seems to be quite active in her service.

Yes, she does seem to represent the interests of her ward, but as a member of the West Berkshire Council Executive she should be acting impartially within her Executive role. In the context of the OP it appears that residents to the South of Newbury are to be targeted as the main contributors to air pollution/traffic congestion at the Burger King Roundabout. That doesn't make sense to me. Surely they would be better surveying the drivers of cars misfortunate enough to be held up by said congestion to find out where they are driving to/from & why they have chosen that route. Perfectly possible that Chievely residents would use the route to get to the Retail Park/Tesco.

Not suggesting that they stop cars ( thus adding to delays & congestion) as I seem to remember they did on the A4 at Speen some time ago, but maybe they could utilise the parking boards to publicise an online survey or put some notices on the offending roundabout to the same effect.

[MontyPython]

How can it be 'overtime'? WBC are not doing the work (as best I can see)

The consultants frequently allow the council staff to do the work and earn a little extra!

[On the edge]

Strikes me as very odd that we have Councillors who claim to be in touch with their constituents but we need to employ consultants to find out what they think!

[Cognosco]

I think Blackdog's earlier comment got it right. These ideas just come from the staff and are just rubber stamped by the portfolio holder; or whatever the Councillor with the brain cell is called these days. I reality, the staff don't come up with the ideas either, that's the province of the consulting house, IT software, or equipment salesman. Most of these firms even write the justification paper. WBC is easy pickings!

I have noticed that WBC usually follows some other local authorities footsteps, only trouble is it is usually after what the others have found does not work or is out of date!
Still baffled as to a £90000 spend just to inform us that too many people are not prepared to walk and that there is no decent public transport to where and when they want to get to?

[Exhausted]

I have noticed that WBC usually follows some other local authorities footsteps, only trouble is it is usually after what the others have found does not work or is out of date! Still baffled as to a £90000 spend just to inform us that too many people are not prepared to walk and that there is no decent public transport to where and when they want to get to?

I always believed that a consultation, which must be something that consultants are aiming for, should be targeted at providing a solution to a problem. If that is the case, the problem has to be the measured pollution level at the Burger King roundabout. Because the level is outside the guidelines then they, WBC, must be seen to be doing something to resolve the problem.

It sort of goes like this within the walls of the council bastion.

So, here we are then, what's our best cop out boys.?. I know, we don't have to do anything if we can dress up this £90 grand expenditure so that we can say it's the first stage of a process which will get everybody on a bike. Question from the table, "Will this work then?".

No, but it will give us another couple of years of inactivity which means we can get on with the development at the top of the hill turning a greenfield site into housing. Question from the table, "But won't that make the traffic problem worse and the pollution level higher ?"

That is a vexatious question, get out. Like I was saying, we will have a couple of years and then when we get hauled over the coals again, we can go for another stop gap grant.

Any more stupid questions,

[NWNREADER]

The consultants frequently allow the council staff to do the work and earn a little extra!

They do? You know that for certain?

[MontyPython]

They do? You know that for certain?

Do you know for certain they don't?

[NWNREADER]

Do you know for certain they don't?

You made the claim.......
You to sustain

[MontyPython]

You made the claim.......
You to sustain

I have said that they frequently use council staff - apart from which it is a waste of £90k wherever the money goes!

[NWNREADER]

I have said that they frequently use council staff

And I asked if that is a truth known to you, or a throw-away line.
I don't disagree re the waste of money - as I said earlier too often consultants only tell what the clint should already know.....

[Cognosco]

And I asked if that is a truth known to you, or a throw-away line.
I don't disagree re the waste of money - as I said earlier too often consultants only tell what the clint should already know.....

Or to share some spare cash they have to use up with others of a similar political persuasion? It saves having to spend it on something they don't wish to?

[Cognosco]

Yes, she does seem to represent the interests of her ward, but as a member of the West Berkshire Council Executive she should be acting impartially within her Executive role. In the context of the OP it appears that residents to the South of Newbury are to be targeted as the main contributors to air pollution/traffic congestion at the Burger King Roundabout. That doesn't make sense to me. Surely they would be better surveying the drivers of cars misfortunate enough to be held up by said congestion to find out where they are driving to/from & why they have chosen that route. Perfectly possible that Chievely residents would use the route to get to the Retail Park/Tesco.

Not suggesting that they stop cars ( thus adding to delays & congestion) as I seem to remember they did on the A4 at Speen some time ago, but maybe they could utilise the parking boards to publicise an online survey or put some notices on the offending roundabout to the same effect.

I wonder what is wrong with the usual WBC Consultation procedure..........shout out round the office that the Supreme Leader wants to know how to stop pollution on the Burger King Roundabout........it will save £90k. Only trouble is it may come to banning traffic from the A339 though?

Perhaps it would help to make it a bicycle friendly roundabout like St John's? But oh I forgot Cyclists think it is too complicated and dangerous to use!

[Lolly]

As for it being a waster of £90k, it certainly looks wasteful, but what are you going to do about it?

Rhetorical question?

Theoretically we/you could ask the question at a Council or Executive meeting.
We/you could make a complaint using the Council's complaints process
We/you could complain to our Councillor
Or we/you could ask the Council's/auditors to investigate

Alternatively we could rely on the NWN to follow up on the story. Maybe they could conduct their own survey like they used to do?

[Turin Machine]

"Yeah, but, its to do wiv global warmin innit". Be like discussing theology with the Spanish Inquisition.

[NWNREADER]

The Spanish Inquisition? I don't think we expected them......

[Simon Kirby]

"Yeah, but, its to do wiv global warmin innit". Be like discussing theology with the Spanish Inquisition.

This really is the point. There are a number of legitimate ways to engage our local government as Lolly says, but all of them are broken. It needs new people to get involved in our local politscs who want to make it open and accountable and who aren't going to compromise with the self-serving establisment who like the way it is. But that's a big challenge because the few of us who are making an effort are working alone and ineffectual, and because the establishment really doesn't want anyone upsetting their apple cart.

[Lolly]

This really is the point. There are a number of legitimate ways to engage our local government as Lolly says, but all of them are broken. It needs new people to get involved in our local politscs who want to make it open and accountable and who aren't going to compromise with the self-serving establisment who like the way it is. But that's a big challenge because the few of us who are making an effort are working alone and ineffectual, and because the establishment really doesn't want anyone upsetting their apple cart.

Private Eye? I think they'd appreciate your picture of the other Hilary Cole!

[Biker1]

[On the edge]

Look on the website, all a lot clearer. Simply a marketing activity for a 'people's car', they just need to find out who qualifies. Where do you work? Any disabilities? Member of the party? OK you qualify to go on the list for an E-Trabant.....

[Simon Kirby]

From NewburyToday:

In a statement, West Berkshire Council said that the travel advisers had visited or attempted to visit 1,050 homes since June 9. Of these, 405 had declined a travel pack and 316 had requested one...

"The success rate of our TA's when they speak to someone at the door is 44 per cent. This is above the expected figure of 33 per cent overall," the statement said.

A quick read of that would give you the impression that the scheme is working - the 44% conversion rate is better that the 33% expected. OK, so that 33% seems rather arbitrary, but all the same if the conversion rate is bettering the target then fine, success.

But on closer reading it's apparent that this is a bit of grubby council obfuscation: what the statement is actually saying is that 44% is a bigger percentage than 33%, and so it is - 44 is bigger than 33. But 33% is the target overall conversion rate, and with 316 requesting the pack out of 1050 visited the actual overall conversion rate is 30%, and that's below target.

I just find this kind of casual dishonesty really annoying. It's semantic slight of hand, so the statement is true, but it tells a lie.