I was delighted to be invited to open a new croquet club at Aykley Heads on Sunday. Around 30 people gathered at the bowling greens at Police HQ for the event just after lunch.

Nigel formally cutting the “opening tape” 

The founding of the club realises the ambition of Neville’s Cross resident John Coates who has been working for several years to find a suitable location for a club in the City. He is grateful to the police authority who have allowed the club to use the greens which are no longer used for bowls. Croquet North, the regional federation of croquet clubs, has also helped get the new club off the ground, and their development officer, David Turner, was present to support the event.

There are two types of croquet - ‘Association’ and ‘Golf”. Association is the more complicated game, whereas Golf Croquet is more straightforward, at least in its rules. The Durham Club will tend to concentrate more on Golf Croquet.

I expect to be able to post the contact details for the new club shortly, but if in the meantime you are interested in getting involved, just send me an e-mail and I will put you in touch with John.

Nigel trying (unsuccessfully) to “run a hoop”

After the opening and some light refreshments, experts and total novices enjoyed a game, at least until the rain started!

As the consultation process on a possible Town Council for Durham City is now under way, I have created a dedicated page with links to relevant files. The link is on the upper left of the screen.

This page also contains details of a petition in favour of the proposal and a petition form that you can print out and use. the petition should only be signed by electors living within the affected area.

Many people have concerns about the future of the mayor of Durham after the City Council is abolished next April, especially over who will elect the mayor in future and even whether the mayor will actually be a citizen of Durham City.

At County Hall last Thursday,  our fears were confirmed when the ruling Labour Cabinet decided to ask the government to allow all 126 County Councillors to elect the mayor instead of the 22 who represent the existing area of Durham City district.

I and my fellow Lib Dem Neville’s Cross Councillor Grenville Holland spoke passionately about our belief that the elected representatives of the City should choose the City’s mayor, but we were ignored.

If government listen to their party in power at County Hall, then it is conceivable that future mayors of Durham City could come from Seaham, Sedgefield or Stanley, rather than here in the City itself.

Even more deplorable is the statement in the report that Durham City’s Labour MP, Roberta Blackman-Woods supported this attempt to hijack Durham’s mayor away from the City.

All is not lost, though. The City Council will be putting in a vigorous representation against this idea, and the initial indications from government was that the elected representatives of the City should indeed choose the mayor under the Charter Trust arrangements.

Finally, Charter Trusts are meant to be short-lived affairs, so that when a town council is created for Durham City, the mayor would revert back to the Town Council. Even then, there were suggestions at County Hall that this might be over-ridden.

In my opinion, this appalling decision by the ruling Labour party at County Hall is nothing more than spite against the fact that they have been rejected overwhelmingly by the electors of Durham City. No dount those same electors will know how to respond when the next elections come.

Background - The government have recognised the importance of the mayor to Durham City and have promised that it will continue after local government re-organisation. In cases like this the policy is to establish something called a Charter Trust, the Trustees of which will elect the mayor and maintain its associated civic tradition.

Charter Trusts are meant to be short-lived arrangements within unitary council areas to cover a period until the relevant area (Durham City in this case) is fully served by town and parish councils after which the mayor would be transferred over to the relevant town or parish council within that area.

If the proposal to establish a town council for the currently unparished area of Durham City goes ahead, then this would mean the new Durham town Council would get the mayor, effectively taking things back to where they were before the 1974 changes to the structure of local government …

… unless Labour at County Hall gets its way.

Residents may be aware that County Councillors have been issued with (very up-to-date) mobile phones.

These now have an 0191 number assocatied with them so that if you ring in it will be at local call rates and not mobile rates.

My new number for this is 0191 372 5880.

The Schools Adjudicator, Sir Philip Hunter, issues his decision yesterday on the admissions criteria for Durham Johnston.

In brief, Sir Philip decided that the criteria giving priority to associated transport from specific areas ahead of families close to the school was unfair.

 He specified that the criteria for 2009 entry should be the same as those for 2008 with distance being measured from the closer of the Crossgate and Whinney Hill sites.

He also directed the Council to review it criteria for future years in the light of this decision, pointing out that in mixed urban/rural areas arrangements involving catchment areas or feeder schools were much more common and were more acceptable.

Sir Philip also criticised the public consultation process and the confusion caused in the mind of local people by the way in which the Council has said things in the past.

I believe this is the best outcome for now. It gives the Council time to get its act together and come up with a workable solution.

One point to emerge from all the debate was the fact that the current criteria actually make no difference to the admissions of all but very few schools in the County, as in most areas there is either no alternative school or no real cometition for places.

My conclusion is that in coming up with new criteria, the Council should look very hard at the areas where there is competition and devise rules that deal fairly with these situations. My regret is that the County Council clearly has not taken this approach in the past.

You can see the full judgement at: DJ Adjudicator decision

A very well-attended meeting hosted by the Schools Adjudicator was held last night at the Crossgate Moor site to hear objections to and arguments about the admissions criteria the County Council has proposed for the school.

There were presentations by David Williams, County Director of Children’s Services, Vanessa Kind, a parent governor at St Margaret’s School and Gail McCardle a paretn from Shincliffe. The meeting was then opened up for general comment and debate. In all, the meeting  lasted more than 2 hours.

Although I arrived late (I had to host a couple of hundred people at college - graduates and their families) I did hear all the debate from the floor.

It is clear that there is a strong level of concern among families in Neville’s Cross about admissions criteria which give preference to those living at a distance over those who live close by.

While there was some evidence offered suggesting that the risk to local families of being refused admission was low, I and most local residents were not convinced. I spoke and referred to the significant increase in new houses in the area which would undoubtedly start to impact on the situation in a few years. There had been a serious problem in the mid 1990s and the likelihood of this recurring gave me grave concern.

In addition, I was told by a resident that the demographic data used by the County was well out of date and that there was academic evidence of a recent population increases in the Durham area.

One issue referred to several times was the lack of real opportunity for local people to comment on the proposals before they were agreed.

While the County Councillor for Durham South claimed that he had ‘consulted local people’ I find that hard to believe as the final proposals only emerged in Mid March when we were all getting ready for the local elections. Indeed, we had about 7 days between the committee papers being published and the meeting at which things were due to be decided (although the decisions was deferred for a few weeks because of division in the Labour Group - see an earlier posting).

In reality, the process adopted by the County Council has always effectively excluded local residents, something accepted by the Director at the end of the meeting.

Nonetheless, I hope I am enough in touch with my local people to have a pretty good idea how they feel about this issue (and it was raised on the doorstep in the local election campaign) and the minutes of the County Cabinet show that I did represent them.

So what next? The Adjudicator will consider the matter and give his decision in about 10 days. He has wide powers including setting the admission criteria himself for up to the next three years. So look out for the result here, which will be posted as soon as I have it.

The attempt by Vimac Ltd to open a lap dancing club at The Loft in North Road has at last been killed off.

Vimac had gone to the high court to ask for permission to seek judicial review of the decision of the local magistrates to refuse a licence.

The high court refusal to allow a judicual review was about as unequivocal as it gets and so we must hope that this is now the end of the matter.

While this is the outcome that the overwhelming majority of the local community wanted, there is still great concern about the difficulty of controlling this type of club under existing licensing law.

The fact that this is now recognised nationally and is being taken up on an all-party basis in parliament shows that those who tried to make local party-political mischief over the issue here in Durham should have known better.

It has been common knowledge for some time that I am retiring from my University post at the end of September this year.

Being Principal of Trevelyan College brings with it the requirement to reside in a house in the College, and with impending retirement, Susan and I will be moving out shortly to allow the place to be prepared for my successor.

From 29 June, we shall be living at 5 Harvest View, Hag House Farm, Pity Me, Durham DH1 5RN, and we shall have a new home telephone number: 0191 374 0712. The e-mail address will remain unchanged.

I shall be easily able to pick up mail sent to the College address, at least for the next three months.

I do intend, of course, to continue as the Councillor for Neville’s Cross (City ward and County Division) subject always to the will of the electorate.

If you read the recent Countywide published by the County Council, you will have seen another telephone number, 07500 125 331.

This refers to the new mobile phone that the County has provided (and has offered to all councillor). I have been told that a local 0191 number will soon be allocated for this mobile phone. I will publicise this when I have it. Ringing this number may well be the easiest way to get me quickly.

The following appeared recently in my university e-mail inbox: 

With three events planned for Bike Week 2008, cyclists and would-be cyclists can meet other members of Durham University who regularly cycle to and between its colleges and departments.

They can receive handy hints and advice on cycling matters, improve their fitness and knowledge of rural Durham, join DBUG, and - if these aren’t enough incentives - get some free cake!

During national Bike Week, 14-22 June, DBUG hopes to promote cycling in Durham as a healthy, convenient, enjoyable, pollution-free way of travelling - one which can vastly reduce our carbon footprint in the city.

DBUG is inviting members of the University to two bike rides.

The first is a there-and-back excursion to Finchale Priory on 16 June, retracing the journeys of Durham Cathedral’s monks.

The second, on 21 June, is a more demanding circular loop around Esh Winning, taking in beautiful Durham countryside invisible to motorists.

In between these two events is Bike to Work Cake Day - with home-baked cake for anyone who cycles to work on Wednesday 18 June.

At all three events you can meet and chat to other Durham cyclists who can offer advice and encouragement to anyone who is interested in travelling light on two wheels.

For full details on all of these events, or to join DBUG, visit: www.durham.ac.uk/environment/durini/dbug

Or contact DBUG: bike.group@durham.ac.uk

Our Bike Week events are also listed on www.bikeweek.org.uk

The number of local parents appealing against the County admissions criteria for DJ has grown rapidly and the Schools Adjudicator has decided to hold a hearing on the issue later this month.

My information is that the Adjudicator will hold public meeting at the school on Thursday 26 June at 6 pm. This is to allow parents to make representations.

If there is more information, I will post the details.

In addition, a letter has gone out today from the parent governors of Neville’s Cross Primary School drawing attention to what is going on and letting them know how to make their view known if they have not already done so.

After three months of cones and barrier work, the A167 south of the Cock of the North roundabout down to the Honest Lawyer is complete and everything is cleared away.

On the other hand, apart from a few forgotten cones, to the north of the roundabout all that has been done is a few metres of barrier at the Merryoaks end as pictured.

Given that the spate of fatal accidents over the last couple of years were mainly on this northern stretch, this could be a cause for real concern.

Having spoken to the Northern Engineers Office on Friday, however, I have been assured that this stretch will be completed later in the summer (all being well).

The reason for the gap in the work is that the contractors ran out of the correct kind of barrier!

Apparently, the design of the barriers is non-standard because it has to be erected close to other obstructions (i.e. the trees on the central reservation) and this sort of barrier is in short supply.

This is all rather odd since you would have thought that they could have rather easily measured the total length required when they ordered the stuff in the first place.

The first meeting of the newly-elected Durham County Council met this morning. It was a lively affair.

The first business was to elect a new Chairman and say farewll to Edna Hunter who was the previous Chair and who lost her seat on 1 May. While I have been celebrating the increase in Lib Dem representation at County Hall and the slashing of the Labour majority, I am personally sad for Edna who, with her husband Roland, has been excellent ambassadors for County Durham during her year in office. She has been the first female Chairman of the Council in over 100 years and broke the male glass ceiling at County Hall with great distinction.

But then it was on to the politics.

First the political ‘balance’. As things stood at the start of this week, Labour had 67 members, Lib Dems 27, Conservatives 10 and there were three independent groups, one with 15, one with 6 and one unaffiliated individual. By this morning the independent situation was unclear, one rumoour was that it had gone to two groups 19-3, although the seating in the chamber appeared much more like 16-6. We shall see.

The relevance of the independents is that, in relation to Overview and Scrutiny and after some strong lobbying from the minority parties, Labour said they would agree to minority parties having chairs/vice chairs of some scrutiny committees.

That was the good news, the bad news was that it was only two out of 12 possible such positions (i.e. two vice chairs) and, in a snub to the Lib Dems and the larger Independent group, they would be offered to the smaller Independent group.

Not surprisingly my members were not amused and in response we decided to put forward an alternative slate for the Leader and Cabinet of the Council.

In the end we were defeated by about 66-39 (there are so many councillors now that the clerks had difficulty getting an exact count and I suspect the pro-Labour vote was higher than this). Disappointingly the Conservatives voted against us and with Labour, so now we know where their sympathies lie!

Even so, once the smoke had cleared, both the new Labour Leader and I did agree publicly to work co-operatively to create an effective structure for the new unitary council that will be in place from April 2009.

It cannot be stressed too much how important it is to get effective arrangements in place to bridge the enormous potential gap between what goes on in County Hall in Durham City and the real day-to-day needs of local communities and neighbourhoods across this great county.

Around 70 parents attended a meeting late yesterday afternoon at St Margaret’s School to discuss the change in admissions criteria for Durham Johnston.

The meeting was called by two of its governors, Vanessa Kind and Sue Lyons and I attended to try to explain the situation and how it got to where it has. Grenville Holland, the other recently elected County Councillor was also there.

After a lively discussion, Vanessa Kind, one of the two governors gave a presentation on the working of the Office of the School Adjudicator.

The meeting then agreed to submit a group objection to the Adjudicator on the change of criteria.

Here are the documents from the meeting:

My briefing note for the meeting

Presentation on Schools Adjudicator

Letter detailing the outcome of the meeting

The City Council is holding one of its periodic Residents’ Forums on Wednesday 21 May at Durham Town Hall (6.30 for 7 pm start).

The Forum is on the topic of Premises Licences and is for residents of Crossgate and Framwelgate, Elvet, Neville’s Cross, Pelaw & Gilesgate and St Nicholas wards.

Representatives will be there from the City Council and Durham Constabulary as well as local councillors.

Please do attend and have your say.

I had thought that the recent elections might put and end to the bickering and in-fighting that has been going on in the Labour Group at County Hall for the past two years, but I was clearly wrong.

The news that five of the recently-elected councillors from the Easington district had been suspended by the Labour Party over the issue of women selections means that it is business as usual in this regard.

The five include Albert Nugent, former County Labour Leader, Alan Napier current Easington District Leader and three other newcomers to County Hall, including two women.

This is a really strange collection. After all there were 24 Labour candidates and 19 were elected. What did this famous five do to be picked out? Why not the rest?

Initially Albert and Alan were reported as showing interest in being Leader at County Hall although Alan dropped out of the race early.

The conspiracy theorists might say this was a ruse to prevent Albert being elected Leader (suspension means he and the other four would technically be barred from the Labour Group).

Taking the suspension argument one step further, if these five cannot be members of the Labour Group, then the Labour Group is reduced to 62 and is in a minority of the 126 councillors.

I am looking forward to speaking to the legal eagles at County Hall over this rather interesting state of affairs as it would affect the allocation of committee places in a significant way.

More importantly I shall be trying to get hold of Councillor Simon Henig who was elected Labour Group Leader yesterday to discuss the much more serious issues around moving to the new unitary authority.

County Durham Primary Care trust is holding a series of meetings across the county over the coming fortnight or so to discuss the development of plans for health and health care over the next five years.

The meeting for Durham City area takes place on Thursday 15 May at County Hall (Committee Room 2) between 6 pm and 8 pm.

All members of the public are welcome to attend.

More information is available at http://www.countydurhampct.nhs.uk/

My Colleague for the Neville’s Cross Division on the County Council and City Councillor for Crossgate and Framwelgate Councillor Grenville Holland, was yesterday elected Mayor of Durham. I wish him well for his year in office.

This morning the Northern Echo referred to Grenville as the last Mayor of Durham City. This is, of course, untrue as provision has been made by the Government for the mayoralty to continue under a Charter Trust arrangement from 1 April next year.

The Charter Trust will be controlled by the members elected to the County Council within the area of the current City Council (22 in total for the time being, 15 Lib Dem and 7 Labour) who will elect a mayor annually from among their number. All the civic dignities, such as the Mayor’s Bodyguard, the Mace Bearer and the Sword Bearer will continue along with the pomp and ceremony that goes with it.

Of course, it will cost to keep this going (I have heard the sum of £80K mentioned as the cost of ‘running’ the mayor) and a small supplementary amount will have to be added to the council tax in Durham City to cover it, but everyone I have spoken to is more than happy to pay a few pence per week to continue our centuries-old traditions.

The New 27 member Lib Dem Group met for the first time yesterday evening to have a preliminary discussion on the way forward to oppose Labour at County Hall.

I was delighted to be re-elected unanimously as the Group Leader. In accepting the position, I committed the Lib Dems to be a vigorous and constructive opposition and one which will challenge the ruling Labour Group at every turn.

The key issues in the coming year are around the transition to the new unitary which is due to start on 1 April 2009. The arrangements for working with town and parish councils and for the proposed Area Action Forums (or whatever they are to be called) will be key to making the council work effectively with local communities.

And of course, we in Durham City must get on with the process of creating a Town Council here.

Exciting times!

The count for the Neville’s Cross Division election was declared just after midnight this morning. The figures are:

Across County Durham it was a very bad night for Labour who lost the equivalent of 39 seats with the Lib Dems gaining 17, Independents gaining 16 and the Conservatives gaining 6.

The balance across the County is Labour 67, Lib Dems 27, Independents 22 and Conservatives 10. Labour now has an majority of only 8 over all other parties.

As I predicted we remain the second party and the main opposition to Labour.

The Lib Dem gains were 5 in Durham City, where we took both pairs seats in Framwellgate Moor and in Sherburn, and one of the two seats in Deerness Valley where our candidate, John Wilkinson topped the poll.

Elsewhere we gained one seat in Derwentside, two in Easington, three in Sedgefield and 6 in Wear Valley.

Some big Labour names lost their seats including a former Leader Ken Manton, a former Deputy Leader Brian Walker and the current Chairman of the Council, Edna Hunter, for whom I have particular sympathy as she was the first ever woman to be Chairman of the County Council and has been a particularly good ambassador for County Durham.

So whatever happens now, there will be a breath of fresh air running through County Hall in the coming years.

Exciting times!

I received an e-mail from Banks at 3.40 pm today informing me that they are withdrawing their current application and are not proceeding with the appeal.

This is not the end, however, as they will be putting in revised proposals ‘in due course’.

So we remain vigilant.

Here is the Banks Letter.

It is Sunday and the election is on Thursday. Between us, Grenville Holland and I have now knocked on around 90% on the doors in Neville’s Cross and the response has been very good overall. As usual the ‘outs’ are strongly in the lead, but a big majority are clearly appreciative of the work both he and I have done over the years.

From the canvassing, a number of things are very clear. Firstly, no-one on the doorstep is being taken in by the Tory “poll” showing them ahead of Labour with the Lib Dems in third place.

This is obviously a national poll (a fact I was able to confirm this lunchtime), but, as we know, what is the case in leafy Surrey is no way typical of the North East where the Lib Dems have been the only serious alternative to Labour for many years.

Secondly, Labour are in real trouble. We are picking up a real anger on the doorstep over the Government pushing through the new unitary Council against the clear vote by the people of the County against it.

If this is reflected in other parts of the County, Labour is going to lose lots of seats and it more than possible that they will lose overall control of the County Council.

Given our strength over wide areas and the weakness of the Tories (they won only 3 district council seats outside Teesdale last May compared with 57 for the Lib Dems) we are as certain as can be that the Lib Dems will continue to be the main opposition to Labour at County Hall.

This is because most of the Labour seats under threat are where we are already in a good second place. We are confident therefore that we will have a large group strong enough to ensure that the new Council is organised to be as responsive and accountable as possible to local communities and not remote from the people.

Which leads to the third thing: the idea of a Town Council for Durham City is going down really well on the doorstep.

Just about everyone we have discussed it with thinks it is a good idea and will help to keep the local links that make for good local government.

Once the election is over, the City Council must get on with the wider consultation process to move this project forward.

Here are some recent photos of progress with the new DJ school building

I spoke representing the Lib Dems at a small public meeting hosted by the Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) in Shakespeare Hall yesterday evening. Alongside me was Albert Nugent, Labour Leader of Durham County Council. The Conservatives were invited but failed to send anyone.

In my speech I mentioned my opposition to Academy Schools and particularly those sponsored by the Emmanuel Schools Trust (funded by the Vardys and promoting whacko ideas about evolution).

This elicited a strange response from Albert. He agreed with me. He was also against Academy Schools.

Why strange? Because Durham County Council, led by him, has just decided to proceed with two Academy Schools and are still looking at a third!

No wonder things are going off the rails at County Hall.

The other thing I found out was that the County are in discussion with the Civil Service about using a building at Aykley Heads to deal with ID cards. The building concerned is the detached council block where the County Library Service used to be run from.

Apparently this could attract another 500 workers onto the County Hall site with who-knows-what impact on traffic and parking in local streets.

The thing that annoyed me is that my County Council division includes County Hall, yet no-one in the administration had the courtesy to let me know what was going on so that I could represent the serious and legitimate concerns that residents of North End already have about parking and transport issues.

Yet another cavalier example of how Labour deals with local people.

I have just spoken to the Planning Department who tell me that the public inquiry on Banks Ltd application to develop Mount Oswald will start on 10 June and is expected to last six days.

The location of the inquiry is still to be settled which is why objectors have not yet been notified, but letters should be going out soon giving us the details.

The new green bag recycling scheme looks to be having a few teething problems. There have clearly been problems over getting the collection days right and the quantities being offered for recycling are much larger than expected.

The big increase in volume is welcome in one way, but it will probably reduce as I am sure residents have been saving waste for this new service since mid March.

A handy hint to help the collectors is to put all your plastic together in a (plastic) carrier bag as this makes it much easier for them to sort, although we are being asked to ensure that metal caps are separated out.

Another problem that  a resident shared with me yesterday was with the collectors leaving remnants in the street when they leave. I am asking the council to look into this and hopefully things will  be OK when the service settles down.

An interesting news item appeared in today’s Northern Echo about the chaos there has been in Easington with the selection of candidates for the elections on 1 May.

A representative of the local Labour party was openly discussing the prospect of losing control of the County Council if things went pear-shaped in that part of the County.

Three years ago at the last county elections, this would have been unthinkable.

Now it is thinkable - for the first time in 90 years the tectonic plates of politics in County Durham are starting to shift - there can be a political earthquake on 1 May, all the electors have to do is vote for it!

A meeting is being held on Monday morning (31 March) with the Director of Children’s Services, Councillor Vasey (Cabinet member with the education portfolio) and several Durham City County Councillors (including yours truly) to discuss the way forward. I will report back after.

In the meantime I have been doing some research on the issue of whether Shincliffe and Bowburn are closer (by road) to the Crossgate Moor DJ site or to Gilesgate Comp.

Logically, as all shortest journeys would have to pass the junction on the A177 just along from The Rose Tree, the answer to which is the shorter will be the same for everyone irrespective of the particular house they live in.

So try the following: go to the AA journey planner web site and find the distance between DH1 2YJ (Telford Close in High Shincliffe) and DH1 4SU (Crossgate Moor DJ site) and the distance from DH1 2YJ to DH1 1HN (Gilesgate Comp).

When I did this they both came to 4.03 miles! [But please tell me if I got this wrong - although I did do it twice]

Now I have to issue a word of caution here, since the AA routes may not be the ’shortest safe route’ as defined by the County Council, but this does explain why families in both Bowburn and Shincliffe are confused and upset over the future admissions arrangements.

The current county bussing policy talks about conveying children to the closest appropriate school, and no-one at County Hall has bothered to tell people in that area which this is, even though all that has to be done is to measure the shortest difference from the junction mentioned above.

Forgive me if I go on further about this. Suppose, for the sake of argument that it turns out that Gilesgate is closer and that the County sticks to its policy as stated. Then families can still apply to DJ and may well get a place on the final distance criteria, but then they will have either to drive their children over (great for the environment!) or to pay for bus fares. Either way this disadvantages familes with fewer resources to spare.

DJ Governors repeated their view yesterday at their latest governing body meeting that they wish to maintain their commitment and association with the villages concerned, and indeed this was promised by Councillor Vasey’s Labour Cabinet predecessor in public less than nine months before approval for the new building was finally given. 

There is a way out for the Council, though. The actual admissions criteria that the Cabinet want to adopt also mentions a phrase like ‘economic efficiency’ in relation to bussing arrangements, so they have the chance to decide to retain the existing bus arrangements on economic grounds.

But this all shows how useless Labour are at getting things right. One reason this has blown up is because the local county council members have not been properly consulted as the decision making process has gone on. Now, at the eleventh hour, after a massive rumpus, at last we are.

Do they deserve to be relected in May?

The new green recycling bags have been distributed around much of the area and if yours has not arrived it should do so soon. The new scheme starts next week (1 April), so please do not try to use them before that.

There are some answers to “frequently asked questions” in the following file (which also appeared in a posting on this subject on 3 March):

Recycling Questions and Answers

A copy of the recycling scheme leaflet (which should be inside the bag when delivered) which explains what you can and can’t put in the new green bags (paper, cardboard and plastic) and also what can go in the green box (glass and cans) is here:

Recycling Scheme Leaflet

I’m sure the collection teams will be working hard to make sure that everything runs smoothly. Please let me know if any issues arise. Hopefully we can double recycling rates on the back of this scheme.

The Neville’s Cross Community Centre steering committee met this evening and agreed to move forward with a feasibility study for building a Centre at Neville’s Cross Primary School.

The study, which should be under way within a few weeks, is being funded by a grant from the Durham City Council Flourishing Communities Fund for which the Committee was very grateful.

I received an e-mail yesterday from the public transport co-ordinator at County Hall to say that the District Councils should have posted out all the new national bus passes by last night.

Mine did not arrive today, so I guess they are going out second class!

Remember - unless you have told the City Council otherwise, your replacement will be sent out to the address you gave when you first got yours.

Also, the new bus pass is only valid from 1 April, so keep using the existing one until then.

The row over post office closures rumbles on with  many rural offices identified for closure in spite of loud local protests.

Not so long ago, the Neville’ Cross County Division had two, one on Neville’s Cross Bank and the other on Fieldhouse Lane. Both are now closed leaving us as one of the only county divisions in the whole of County Durham without a post office.

In fact I suspect we are the only such division, although we won’t be for long as things stand.

At Cabinet on Thursday, there was a small detail on one report about the closures in the south of the County, with a recommendation to look at ways of using County Council facilities to fill the gap.

This sees to be an approach that lots of councils around the UK are now looking at and I welcome it and hope that the Post Office as an organisation will co-operate.

Another small note in the press on the subject - our Labour MP, Roberta Blackman-Woods, voted against a motion in parliament condemning post office closures, so I guess we can assume she doesn’t mind them happening.

Governors of DJ have just had a progress note on the new building. Apparently the high winds have slowed some things, but construction is still well on target.

Residents can also expect the Orange mast to be removed during the Easter holiday.

Many will remember the Durham Cobbler who helped expose the Labour administration of the City councils prior to 2001 [when the Lib Dems won and took over].

Now a web site has appeared with equally acid comments about the County Council. The ‘cobblers’ name is there, but it is not clear who is behind the site.

Take a look at cobblers2dcc.blogspot.com.

At the monthly Cabinet meeting at County Hall yesterday, the decision on the admissions criteria for Durham Johnston was deferred to a special meeting to be held early next month.

In a somewhat acrimonious debate, the Labour portfolio holder for Children’s Services, Claire Vasey, asked the Cabinet to make the admissions criteria the same for Durham Johnston as everywhere else.

This would mean that children living more than 2 miles away who were assigned to the school by the County bussing policy would take priority over local Neville’s Cross children living closer to the school.

I pointed out that in the mid 1990s this approach had led to a position where children living perhaps a few hundred yards from the school were in real danger of being denied a place, and that if the criteria reverted to the old ones, then there was a real risk of this happening again.

I also pointed out the the ’sibling link’ criterion which gives preference to brothers and sisters of children already in the school had also created anomalies because of the popularity and success of the DJ sixth form [Durham Johnston is in the best literal handful of true comprehensives in the country for A-level results].

There had been occasions in the past when students had come into the school just for the sixth form from up to 20 miles away and the families had then claimed priority for an eleven year old on the basis of sibling link.

This is clearly unfair to local children. The governors got a special rule inserted into the DJ criteria some years ago to prevent this, but the proposals on the table would take that protection away.

Add to the mix the fact that the Mac Williams, Labour councillor for the area covering Shincliffe and Bowburn, complained bitterly that he had not been consulted at any stage (neither had I, although I contributed to the debates on the school governing body), and the Cabinet suddenly split on the issue.

Claire Vasey was supported by the Deputy Leader Clive Robson, only for the Leader, Albert Nugent, to move that the decision be deferred for further discussion.

There was a vote and for the first time in public in my 23 years at County Hall, the ruling Labour leadership split. The vote went 7 - 3 in favour of deferring the issue for more consultation with the interested parties.

What is more, the Deputy Leader voted against the Leader!

So, if you have got this far, you will perhaps agree with me that it is a good job there are elections in 6 weeks time so we can get rid of this divided and ineffective lot.

A new telephone service to deal with the full range of Revenues and Benefits enquiries (e.g. council tax, housing benefit, business rates) goes live on Friday 14 March. It will be available 24 hours a day 365 days a year. The number will be

0845 9400 820

The new service will be quicker (no waiting- it is supposed to respond in less than three rings).

Leaflets on it will be available in all city info units in the near future; a copy of the Leaflet can be seen here.

There is to be a new (and I hope much improved) recycling scheme from 1 April. Durham City Council has gone into partnership with Chester-le-Street, Easington and Sedgefield Councils for a new contract which will make it easier for residents to recycle a much wider range of items in future.

A leaflet explaining the changes will drop through residents’ letterboxes in the next week or ten days.

The current green box scheme allows  everyone to recycle newspapers, bottles and cans; some areas can also have  purple plastic sacks for carboard and plastic, but not everywhere.

The new contract (with a firm called Greencycle) will given everyone a sturdy large sack for cardboard and plastic.

In the meantime here is a file of kerbside recycling Frequently Asked Questions which should help residents get an idea of what is involved and the scope of the scheme.

The English National Concessionary Bus Travel Scheme comes into force on 1 April 2008.

The County Council has produced a leaflet which I have managed to manufacture as a pdf-file and can be viewed below.

County Durham Travel - National Bus Pass Leaflet

Some key points are:

• Existing passholders will automatically be sent a new pass in the post before 1 April (so if you do not get one by then contact the City Council straight away - you should not use the old one after 1 April).
• It follows that anyone who has changed address since they got their current pass may need to contact the City Council now to ensure their replacement gets to them in time.
• Travel rules with the County remain the same, but elsewhere the new pass cannot be used before 9.30 am or after 11 pm Monday - Friday, nor in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man or the Channel Islands.
• Similarly the new pass cannot be used on long distance coach services such as National Express or private coach excursions and tours.

The contact telephone number for Durham City Council is 0191 301 8499 or you can do so on the City web site via www.durhamcity.gov.uk/ContactUs

After what appears much behind-the-scenes negotiation, the Police Authority set its council tax rate yesterday evening.

It came in at £142.47 for a Band D property, a rise of 4.97%.

this means that the total Band D council tax for people in Neville’s Cross will be £1,436.09, a rise of just under 3% from last year.

I received on Wednesday to tell me that I had been re-elected to the Governing Council of the County Durham and Darlington Acute Hospitals Foundation Trust for a three year term.

Many thanks to those who supported me.

The voting figures were:

I remain very concerned about the small number of residents who have ‘joined’ the trust and so are able to take part in the election.

I do encourage as many people to join as possible to make public accountability more effective.

Details of how to do this are in my earlier “manifesto” posting on the subject.

The County and City Councils both held their budget meetings yesterday.

In the morning at County Hall, the controlling Labour group pushed through a 2.9% increase. As Leader of the Lib Dem opposition I moved an amendment to reduce the increase to 1.9%, but we naturally lost the vote.

The County seems awash with cash this year. It had a much larger than expected increase in Government grant (over 7% up) and also failed to spend the money it raised last year (otherwise known as savings). Our lower proposal was eminently affordable without any cuts in services.

On the other hand the Lib Dem controlled City Council , later the same day, voted for a 1.9% increase in spite of having a miserly increase in Government grant (just over 1% up). When I look back to the parlous state of the City finances that we inherited from the previous Labour administration in 2003, we have done a really good job to get things so well under control (well I would say that I suppose…)

So the headline Band D rate for the County will be £1,024.38 next year, and for the City £186.62.

The Fire Authority met last week and have agreed a rate of £82.62 (a 2.9% increase).

The Police authority also met last week but failed to agreed a rate. The situation is peculiar since it is necessary both for a majority of the members to vote for it and a majority of the Councillor members. It seems that the overall majority wanted one thing but the Labour Councillors (excluding the member from Darlington) wanted something else and blocked will of the majority.

They meet again tonight (Wednesday) - more fun and games in the Labour Group at County Hall no doubt.

There is a public meeting on THURSDAY 28 FEBRUARY to hear about what a Town Council for Durham City might mean for our area.

The meeting is in the Alington House Community Centre on North Bailey at 7pm and should last about an hour. The mayor will chair the meeting.

I believe that with the new, very big, unitary County Council looming, we need a really local council in Durham. So come along and find out what is involved - and make your own mind up.

I have just received a letter from the Planning Department to let me know that Banks are going to appeal on their planning application for Mount Oswald.

This will mean that a public inquiry will take place later this year.

From the letter, it looks like all those who formally objected have been notified, but if you did object and have not heard from the Planning Department, do let me know.

The details of the appeal are deposited at Byland Lodge. any further representations have to be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate (details later) by 21 March.

I want to consult with colleagues first, but objectors will need to get together to organise the opposition as effectively as possible.

I will post some suggestions for co-ordinating our action in a few days.

With the end of the financial year approaching I have been allocating my remaining “local initiative” money from County Hall and have ben pleased to make a grant of £300 to the Friends of Flass Vale to help purchase nesting boxes for the Vale.

This is a good present for them and will add to their celebration of the creation of the formal nature reserve in the area in 10 days time.

Flass Vale will be formally declared an official Nature Reserve on Monday 25 February in the presence of local councillor and Mayor Boy Wynn.

This is a great tribute to the efforts of the Friend of Flass Vale over the years to improve the area and preserve it as a natural place for the enjoyment of the public.

I have just discovered that The Friends have a web site (www.fofv.org.uk) , which at the moment is just s photograph of the area. They are asking for help with developing the site, so if anyone is prepared to volunteer to assist, do drop an e-mail to them at contact@fofv.org.uk

I am up for re-election as a Public Governor of County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust (CDDFT) to represent the Durham City District.

It is very difficult to communicate with the (500 or so) electors as candidates only had 100 words to promote themselves on the ballot information that is being sent out today.

So if you are an elector and are reading this, I hope you will see from this web site that I am a campaigning local councillor who knows how to call people to account. [For details about how to become an elector, se the end of this posting.]

I was elected as the third of three representatives for Durham City a year ago. Since then I have attended every meeting of the Governors and of the two committees I am on. I have been Chair of the Audit Committee which is responsible for appointing the Trust Auditors and for reporting back to Governors on the financial arrangements of the Trust.

I have also been a member of the Advisory Committee, which has done a lot of work in the first year of the Foundation Trust in sorting out important (if not very exciting) procedural issues.

Foundation trusts have a very different relationship with local communities and with government compared to non-foundation trusts. They have to operate in a more ‘commercial’ fashion and are more susceptible to changing relationships with primary care trusts (PCTs) and GP services.

The new Chief Executive has started a new initiative called “Seizing the Future” which will do a fundamental review of services. There is information about this at a link on the web page http://www.cddft.nhs.uk/. Governors will be fully involved in the process.

In my view we have to ensure that hospital services remain accessible to the communities they serve. That will be my main focus if I am re-elected.

We all know that public transport services have deteriorated over the past 20 years, so I will aim to use my links with the County Council to lobby for a joined up approach by the Trust and the Council to provide the sort of service we all expect.

My other focus will be on the financial side where my long experience of holding to account those who spend public money will be valuable.

I am particularly concerned to look closely at the various privatised services to see whether they do the job we expect and whether we get value for money. I hope that if you are able to vote, you will give me your support.

Joining the trust

If you are not an elector (or ‘member of the Trust’ as it is properly described) but are over 16 and live within the area served by the trust, may I encourage you and your family members to join. Here is a membership application form.

Click on http://www.cddft.nhs.uk/About+Us/FoundationTrustStatus/Home.htm to find out more - you cannot vote in this election, but if you join, you will be able to vote or stand as a candidate in your area in the future.

I was notified today that work is to start very soon (possibly next week) to install crash barriers on the central reservation of the A167 north and south of the Cock of the North roundabout where there have beeen several fatal accidents over the past three years.

North of the roundabout there will be a barrier only on the southbound side (where the accidents have been).  The work will take around 8 weeks or so.

This work will not stop accidents, however. If people drive too fast, the danger will persist, although we can hope that the outcomes may be less severe.

Thanks to everyone who contacted me to express their concern (which I share) about the proposed Buzz Barr that would have had a series of Neville’s Cross bus stops licenced for drinking alcohol!

 The parts of the application that refer to the bus stops on the A167 have now been withdrawn (for now) leaving only the lay by on the A690 Sunderland Road on the left just below Rainton Gate.

The law that specifies how licence applications are to be advertised leaves much to be desired - neither the residents next to the lay-by nor the County Scout and Guides who have their main camp site adjacent to the lay-by knew anything of the matter until after the period for representations was over.

In the event that the licence is granted, the application for the A167 bus stops may re-appear. I shall be vigilant.

… and the Lib Dem Group at County Hall are trying to persuade the ruling Labour Group to keep the council tax rise down as much as possible.

This morning, the County Council cabinet agreed a recommendation of a 2.9% increase to be meade to a meeting of the full council on 26 February.

We are convinced that there is scope to do better than this as council has underspent its 2007-8 budget and has had a much bigger than expected government grant.

Government nationally is talking about wage rises being kept to around 2% (or 1.9% if you are a policeman) and we shall be proposing a rate much closer to that come budget making day.

Many local people have been alarmed by the suggestion that the Lord Londonderry statue and his companion Neptune should be moved from the Market Place in the City.

For myself I am totally against this proposal which has been made by one of the council officers and has not come from the controlling Lib Dem Group.

The statues are a feature of the city centre and the steps around Lord Londonderry’s plinth are a favourite place for people to meet and rest.

I hope the public reaction will see this idea quickly thrown out.

Local Lib Dems held a selection meeting on Sunday to choose their candidates for the elections for the new unitary council due to be held on 1 May 2008.

I am pleased to report that I was re-selected to stand in the Neville’s Cross Division (covering the Neville’s Cross and  Crossgate and Framwellgate City Council wards).

With the re-organisation of the Council, there will be two councillors elected and my fellow candidate will be Grenville Holland, currently a City Council for Crossgate and Framwellgate and Deputy Mayor of the City (due to become Mayor in May).

Grenville has been an active City Councillor since 1987 and was a geology Lecturer at the University.  He also has a strong connection with the game of cricket having been President of the University Cricket Club for over 30 years and a strong voice for university cricket at national level.

We look forward for local support in May.

A flier has just been issued by the County Council asking community groups to suggest places for expenditure on footpath improvements. There is a deadline of 15 February 2008 for suggestions to be submitted.

A cut-down versionof the Local Transport Plan footpath funding flier can be seen here (I had to remove the pictures to make the file small enough to upload onto the blog site).

Remember, this is for suggestions from community groups, not individuals. If you have a particular concern yourself, please contact me directly.

Of course it would help if we had a proper community centre in Neville’s Cross, but that is still “work in progress”.

The school had a wonderful two days on Friday and Saturday with several hundred former pupils, families and friends visiting the school.

The Mayor, Councillor Bob Wynn with Mayoress Nora Fisher visited the school on the Saturday afternoon and were escorted round the various displays of memorabilia by Hannah (shown above) who is herself the granddaughter of a former Mayor of Durham City.

There were many records of the past to be seen (did you know the original school had cost £4,500 to build when it opened in January 1908?), as well as displays of work done by the present pupils relating to the many changes that had taken place over 100 years.

Councillor Wynn, who is himself a governor of the school, congratulated everyone connected with the school for the hard work that had gone in to make the event a resounding success, before partaking of tea and cakes provided by the Neville’s Cross WI.

I am hoping that it will be possible to upgrade Mill Hill Lane to allow cyclists to use it legally.

Mill Hill Lane is a very well used path from Merryoaks to the Colleges on South Road and down into the city. Over the years I have been able to get the pathway upgraded, flooding has been dealt with and extra lighting has been put in - but it remains technically just a footpath and there are signs prohibiting cycling.

Following a request from a local resident, County are now actively looking at ways to improve the route for cyclists. The main work needed is to increase the width of the path to provide separation of cyclists and pedestrians.

There are two main issues involved, the first is getting permission from the various landowners (and who they are does not seem very clear) and then putting the funding together for the work.

So it won’t happen overnight, but it will undoubtedly be a benefit for the area so I have given my backing to the project.

There was a meeting this afternoon between some city centre councillors, county council officers and the Secretary of the County Association of Town and Parish Councils to discuss issues around forming a Town Council for Durham City when the unitary County Council is set up.

A Town Council for the City (i.e. the area covered by the old City Council pre-1974) would have the same powers as a parish council (like Belmont or Framwellgate Moor parishes).

I am keen to support this idea as it will help to counter the “remote county council” fears that many people have for the new unitary council. Indeed several areas elsewhere in County Durham have recently gone through the process to set up a town or parish council where none existed before because they see the advantage of being “local”.

The next stage will be public meetings to discuss the issues involved and to get public support for the idea. Watch out for the dates when they are announced.

I met a constituent at the planning meeting last night who drew my attention to a strange licence application for something called the BUZZ BARR.

Apparently this is an application for a drinks licence for a bus that will ride around the streets of Durham at night. I am told, however, that it is now illegal to serve alcohol on a moving bus (although you can drink while it moves), so the cunning wheeze is for the bus to stop at designated sites (normally bus stops) while drinks are dispensed.

This is where it gets very strange, as to make this legal, the operator has to licence the ‘premises’ where this happens. But premises cannot be mobile, so it is the bus lay by that is the licensed location.

So an application has gone in to licence a number of these locations for the bus to stop in, including several on the A167 through Neville’s Cross.

My initial reaction is ‘you cannot be serious’ to quote a certain tennis player, but I would love to know what my constituents think about it, so please do get in touch.

The meeting of the Durham City Development Control Committee last night was packed out as it considered the application by Banks Ltd to develop Mount Oswald.

Following a summary of the (damning) planning officer’s report, two local residents spoke against it and then so did I as the local ward councillor. Here is my speech to the Planning Committee.

In the end there was little real discussion by the members of the Committee as the report and its recommendations were so clear cut. The application was refused by a unanimous vote.

But this is probably not the end of the matter. Banks have already tried to appeal once on the grounds that the Council delayed the decision too long. That was rejected out-of-hand by the government inspectorate - Banks had got their facts wrong (along with so much else in this case).

No doubt they will now try to appeal to the Secretary of State in spite of the opposition from the Highways Agency, One North East, the North East Assembly, the County Council and just about anyone else too.

The strange thing is how Banks have failed to attempt any discussion or negotiation with the Council over the issues that the application raised. They must have spent well over £100K on this application which looks as though it was doomed to failure from the start because it was deficient in almost every department.

 Is something else going on? We shall have to wait and see - and remain vigilant.

Many residents have expressed concern about how the local council deals with the issue of converting family houses into HMOs.

At the moment, councils in England have almost no powers to consider such a change of use under planning laws, unlike in Northern Ireland where they can.

After much pressure (and, it has to be said, from MPs of all parties), the Government is now consulting on changing the law in England to give local councils stronger powers in this area.

It was good, therefore, that the City Council passed a unanimous motion last night to add its weight behind the pressure for change.

There was a lively meeting of the City Council at the Gala Theatre last night when a Labour Councillor put a motion accusing the Chair of the Council Licensing Committee of ignorance and failure to guide her committee properly when it considered the infamous Loft Application (see earlier posting for all the details).

I spoke at the meeting to say that I thought it was party politicking of the basest kind to use a personal attack on another Councillor (who has formal qualifications in the area and chaired the committee advised by legally qualified council staff), when the real problem was the inadequacy of the Licensing Act.

I was not surpised when several of his own Labour Group failed to support him in the final vote that defeated the motion.

Nevilles Cross Primary School celebrates its 100^th birthday in 2008. As part of the centenary celebrations, the school is holding Open Days on Friday 18 January (1.30 - 3pm) and Saturday 19 January (11am – 3pm) when visitors will be welcome.

On the Saturday, Merryoaks W.I. will provide refreshments in the style of an Edwardian Tea Shop in the school hall; some of the children will be helping to serve. The W.I. group celebrate their 40^th birthday this year and have met at the school for virtually all those years.

The Mayor, Councillor Bob Wynn and Lady Mayoress, Mrs Nora Fisher will visit at 2pm on Saturday. Bob is a longstanding friend of the school and serves in the Governing Body.

The school would love to see former pupils and staff so please talk to your neighbours and friends and encourage them to go along and share the celebrations.

It looks as though Mark Lloyd, the Chief Executive of Durham County Council will be leaving the North East for a similar post at the head of Cambridgeshire County Council. His appointment is on the agenda for a Cambridgeshire County Council meeting on 10 January 2008.

Although Mark has been a driving force behind the move to unitary local government in County Durham, I have always found him a top class officer who has worked hard for the County and who has always played fair with the minority groups while, of course, having to implement the policies of the ruling Labour group. I certainly wish him well in his future career.

The down side of this move is that Durham County Council will be left without a Chief Executive at a time when the extremely complex move to unitary status is taking place [subject to the judicial review appeal that is due to be heard in a few weeks time].

No doubt the existing senior officers at County Hall will work hard to cover all the bases, but the priority must now be to get a new Chief Executive appointed as soon as possible, especially as the leadership of the Labour Group has been looking so flaky in recent weeks.

As expected, the planners at Durham City Council have recommended refusal of the Banks planning application for Mount Oswald.

The matter is on the agenda for the City Council Development Control Committee on Thursday 10 January 2008 (5.30 pm at The Studio, Gala Theatre, Durham City).

The report (which you can see here: Banks Mount Oswald Planning report ) is scathing about the application and has virtually nothing good to say about it. Indeed the Highways Agency has gone so far as to issue a directive to the Council to refuse the application because it does not address properly the impact of the development on the strategic road network around Durham City.

So the application will be refused which is excellent news for the hundreds of local people who have supported the campaign against this montrous proposal.

Nonetheless, I hope lots of people will turn up to the meeting to show their support for having this application tossed out.

Our new Lib Dem leader4, Nick Clegg, has issued his New year message for 2008. It is attached here: Lib Dem Leader 2008 New Year Message

A key message is our opposition to ID cards. You can see more about this issue at http://www.libdems.org.uk/noidcards/

In addition you can view and comment on the New Year message on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRFJ7K2SiSo

The Northern Echo today revealed that Banks are already trying to go over the head of the Council by appealing to the Secretary of State against the time taken to deal with their planning application.

OK, there is a guideline period and it looks like the council will be a couple of weeks over the limit, but given the complexity of the application, the extraordinary number of formal objections (over 130) and the fact that Banks seems to have been unwilling to engage with the council officers in discussing these objections, not to mention that the Christmas holiday period it is not surprising that the process has overrun the guideline marginally.

Frankly, to me this looks like Banks are clutching at straws. I sincerely hope that the Secretary of State sees that it is more important to take the right decision than to take a quick decision, especially for such a major and controversial application.

A new facility has been added to this site to allow you to have your say. Just click on the word ‘comment’ under the date of a posting, type your thoughts into the box that appears and click on ’submit’.

I look forward to hearing from you.

As residents will know, the Town Hall is being refurbished and is out of use. One of the main objectives is to improve access, so it was good to learn yesterday that the new lift has been delivered and the final phase of the work can start.

The completion date is not yet known, but with a fair wind the Town Hall should be open to the public again in February or March next year.

I had an e-mail this week from the council to say that Banks have been told that they Council will be recommending refusal of their planning application for the development of the Mount Oswald golf course for a business park and executive housing.

Banks now have the opportunity to withdraw their application, but if they do not the application is likely to be on the agenda of the Development Control Committee on Thursday 10 January.

So things are looking good, but  we must not be complacent.

Neville’s Cross Primary School celebrates its centenary in 2008. To mark the event, seven trees were planted in the school grounds and a number of ‘whips’. Each class was responsible for finishing off the planting of one of the trees.

I was pleased to be able to support the costs from a £500 grant from my County Council community fund.

The County Council is ‘consulting’ on three possible Academies in the County including one in the Durham City Area.

An Academy is a new school set up to replace one or more existing schools and must have sponsorship of £2M. In return for the money the sponsor gets the right to pack the school governing body with his/her/its own nominees and the Academy can make its own decisions on school admissions.

Naturally the Labour run County Council does not want to lose control of a school like this, so has come up with the cunning idea of being a partner sponsor where the Council puts up half of the additional money on the understanding that the sponsor donor of the other half plays ball on things like admissions.

Apart from believing that it is the quality of school management that makes a good school, not additional cash (although additional cash is always welcome) this is a bizarre way of doing business.

Firstly the Council’s additional £1M is money being taken away from other things the Council should be doing and why should one school get this additional money from local funds over and above what the other schools get.

Secondly, why would a sponsor give £1M when they don’t get influence in the school, and why should people/organisations buy such influence anyway?

Thirdly, the Academy arrangements lie outside any plans the Council may have in investing in the refurbishment/replacement of school under the Goverments Building School for The Future project.

This cannot be the right way to go about things.

Whether you agree with me or not, you can have your say on Wednesday 14 November at a public meeting at Gilesgate Comprehensive School and on Thursday 15 November at Belmont Comprehensive. Both meetings start at 7 pm.

The annual Durham Christmas Festival is being held this year over the wekend Saturday 1 and Sunday 2 December; as usual this includes a Craft and Gift Marquee on Palace Green.

A special preview evening aimed at those with mobility difficulties is being held on Friday 30 November, 5 pm - 8 pm, with a free accessible bus service running between the coach park and Palace Green stopping off at the Market Square. There will also be limited free parking on Palace Green for blue badge holders.

Further information about the preview evening can be had by contacting Jo on 0191 384 6153 or Colin Wilkes at colin@durhammarkets.co.uk

While the struggle goes on to retain the District Councils, the Lib Dem Parliamentary team won a victory in Parliament today when the Government backed down on one of their madder proposals.

The Local Government Bill was due to make provision for directly elected Council Executives which most councillors across all parties think this is a bonkers idea.

Following a campaign by the Lib Dems in the Lords, the Upper House agreed and threw this out.

Today the Government spared themselves further ridicule and backed off this daft idea.

Progress on the new City swimming pool is going, well - swimmingly (sorry!).

Things appear on target for an opening next July. Plans for staff recruitment and training are progressing well.

Have just counted the returns to date and I have 134, with more appearing every day.

Excellent - keep them coming in!

I have just heard from the City Planning Department that the building at the derelict filling station at Neville’s Cross will be demolished starting next Monday (22 October).

 I just hope this is a pre-cursor to a planning application to re-develop the site. While we really don’t want much more in the area, this has to be the exception. It is a blot on the landscape and needs dealing with sooner rather than later.

Here is the Mount Oswald Survey FOCUS (pdf file) distributed to the Neville’s Cross City Council ward over the weekend 6-7 October 2007.

Yesterday and today we put out over 1,400 survey leaflets over the Neville’s Cross city council ward asking for feedback on what residents feel about the future of Mount Oswald.

I am quite clear that the current planning application from Banks is totally unacceptable. The area is not zoned for housing and although it is cited for low density high class business/science park use in the Local Plan what Banks are proposing (developing 40% of the area for this purpose) is well beyond what is acceptable.

The traffic implications are also bad news. The application includes up to 2,000 parking places, so the local road network would have to cope with upwards of 4,000 additional traffic movements per day. Anyone who has used the A167 through Neville’s Cross as most residents do, knows all too well that it is close to gridlock at times; the effect of 4,000 extra journeys does not bear thinking about.

I have already had initial discussions with the planners in the County Highways Department and it is clear that they also have significant concerns in that area too.

All this leaves me wondering what exactly is going on here. The application weighs a lot (two massive files each about 10 cm thick) and must have cost a lot (the application fee to the Council is £25,000) but the content seems to be outside all sensible parameters.

This is why I really want to get some feedback from local residents about the future of Mount Oswald. I cannot believe that this is the final shot from Banks and as the local councillor I need to know what my constituents think.

If the overwhelming view is - leave it alone, then I will fight for that all the way, but people have also been asking why have we had all the extra houses in the ward (a 50+% increase in the past 20 years) without any extra facilities.

IF the Local Plan is used to force through some development at Mount Oswald, then we need to know what people really want to see and what residents priorities are to improve the area overall.

SWo if you are reading this and you have a survey sitting on the mantelpiece, please return it to the FREEPOST address given on it.

This week Banks have submitted their expected planning proposal for the Mount Oswald Golf Course. The main headlines are:

• 40% development of the site (against the 10% in the planning guidelines) - it looks a lot more than that to me!
• 30 “executive homes” at the south end - the commentary seems to indicate a value of £1 million for each property.
• A “prestige business park” across the whole of the northern end.
• A substantial public park across the centre.
• Parking for 2,000 cars.

The planning application has been flagged to go to Committee and can be inspected at the City Council Planning Office at Byland Lodge during normal working hours.

The planning reference number is 4/07/00944/OUT.

E-mail me to let me know what you feel or to find out more.