Burmantofts and Richmond Hill Neighbourhood Survey 2012

“Do you like where you live? What would you change to make it better?”

“This survey is being undertaken on behalf of all the agencies that work in the area and the Council’s Inner East Area Committee”, and the sad thing is that they couldn’t find in all these “agencies” one single person who could compile a decent questionnaire!!

In fact, the “questionnaire” is SO WRONG that it’s hard to tell how to make it better..perhaps starting all over again?

First and foremost, it only provides if any, a very small space to add comments and answers to open questions. This is either a huge oversight, or a deliberate and shameful attempt to discourage residents from actually giving their own opinion. But, as I have to remind myself often, we shouldn’t look for conspiracies, if blatant inadequacy might be the answer..

It also often only gives two choices YES/NO with no other possibility such as “Maybe” “unsure”” prefer not to say” etc.

So, let’s forget about the one thing that has improved in the area (Q2) and the one thing (Q2) that hasn’t, and proceed to environmental improvements (Q3).

What is the purpose of this question? Do you think ANYONE actually likes graffiti, litter, vandalism and dog mess? NO. No one likes the above, and yet they are not removed.

As for environmental improvements we would like to see, well, what about cleaning the streets AFTER the bin collections instead of one day BEFORE? (That would have made a fine LCC survey question..)

What about flagstone pavements taken out for maintenance works being returned instead of taken away for good? (I would also like to know where did LCC take them, but I can’t really ask, due to short space for Q5: Let us know of any other you would like to see..I would like to see the flagstones back.)

Or what about better security of boarded up former Council buildings that fall prey to theft and antisocial behaviour on a daily basis in Richmond Hill.

Oh.., let’s go to the next session “Employment, Training, Schools”.

This is a funny one, because there is no mention of employment opportunities, training or schools that one would expect to find under such heading.

Instead there are one and a half pages (out of 6 in total, so much for “neighbourhood” survey) of badly thought of, intrusive personal questions about YOU the respondent.

What is LCC aim to get out of those? These questions have already been answered in some detail at the last census and they will soon be available. How is LCC going to deal with this personal information it gets? Who will be responsible for it?

Plus, if the purpose of them is to ascertain the level of employment, then again, a lot is missing: we know from research that the biggest cause of poverty in our neighbourhoods is not “unemployment” but “underemployment”, ie part time, badly paid shift work. And yet “part time” employment is not even mentioned!!!!

Things to Do and Place to Go

Again, there is no place to write what sort of activities we want etc.(Q15 Q19 Q20). Open ended questions need more space.

But the most ridiculous thing is Q16 and Q17. If I were a shopkeeper/businessman in the area I would be talking to my solicitor right now! We are invited to say which shops we use and the only two choices we’ve got are Post Office and Mini Market.

What about the laundrette? Cafes? The local Charity shop? The local Chip Shop? I am hurt on their behalf for that omission..Has the person who compiled the questionnaire NEVER been in the area?

Questions 21 22 23 are out of this world. Obviously part of some “inspirational” “happiness agenda” but again.. please!! “More leisure activities?” NO. More leisure services, libraries, day centres for the elderly. Oh, wait a minute! We had those, and you closed them down!

Plus none of these things makes people happy. Their absence on the other hand definitely contributes to their unhappiness.

And the fun doesn’t stop here:

Q30 “How would you like to be involved in this?” Only has two options and they are both a hoot!

1. Community ideas day
2. A postal voting card

There is no other option, or space to actually answer the question using your own words (God forbid..)

But NO!! NONE OF THE ABOVE! What about getting together with your neighbours at a community forum? Talking to your councillors in their surgeries? Have access to more public space, more clear information and more open debate?

No more tokenist gimmicks!

Priorities

Now the serious stuff. Tick your first 3 priorities, among environment, crime and community confidence, health and wellbeing (well, that makes sense since people in our area die younger and get more cancers apparently, based on data discussed at the last Inner East meeting), school attendance (this is the first time schools are actually mentioned in the questionnaire- it shows how much LCC values education, or how much they think WE value it), jobs/training or other.

How about dealing with the effects of a large transient population, due to unregulated flat conversions and equally unregulated emergency accommodation contracts?

How about filling the gaps form Council Services deserting the area ( library, day centre, old people’s home, hostel, sport’s centre, job shop?).

How about dealing with aggressive new developments blocking public rights of way, purchasing listed buildings and letting them rot, getting away with not paying s.106 money and creating gated communities within ours, further deepening the fragmentation and decay in places where there is very little left?

I will not comment on particular questions any further, it’s a futile task.

But I can’t help thinking of the irony of the whole “Health and Wellbeing” section, especially since the Council has agreed to build a huge incinerator next to our houses.

We don’t needd “activities” in our area! We need infrastructure. We need honest democratic debate. We need a decent living environment.

I would also like to know how much this questionnaire cost and who is responsible for it.

Because, this is a bad product.

And, I, as a council tax payer, would like my money back!

View from the Civic Hall

Our local library’s faith was sealed on Wednesday, when the Executive Board of the Leeds City Council met to vote on the recommendations. COVEN was present at the meeting, in order to follow up a campaign that we fought consistently, through involvement with the community, through our representation to the Leeds City Council and through this blog.

The good news from the meeting was that NOT all libraries earmarked for closure are going to be closed down. Communities all over Leeds fought to keep their libraries open and some succeeded. We didn’t.

Our neighbourhood is going to lose a very important resource, another one of a number of services closing down in the area, with purpose-built buildings increasingly left boarded up, such as the former Day Centre and soon, the hostel on Walter Crescent. Furthermore, as Cllr Golton noted at the meeting, the position of the mobile libraries brought in instead, will not match geographically the location of the library, leaving communities south of York Road without easy access to them.

Councillors from different wards commented on their localities’ needs but, unfortunately, none of our three councillors had anything to say on our behalf.

So, in our area, the library service will provide “targeted” children’s and family mobile services to the new Richmond Hill school, with a computer suite in the newly extended community centre. But although there will also be “fortnightly” mobiles for older people and weekly children’s mobiles, the mobile provision will be located in the part of Richmond Hill on the left of the railway, leaving the whole of East End Park, including the AllSaints’ primary school without any access to a library!!!

One other thing that felt really wrong was the councillors in the meeting, congratulating themselves on a “detailed” consultation. We have previously voiced our concerns over the nature of the consultation, but more problems with it emerged during the meeting. One of the main contributors in the consultation project was the Citizens’ Panel, which is mentioned often in the documents, sometimes having backed council proposals up to 90%. Only it turns out, as Cllr Carter noted, only 25% of the Citizens’ Panel questionnaires were returned!

So, when for example it is stated that “77% ( of the panel) agreed that the council should consolidate the number of libraries it has” in order to improve the quality, we are talking about the 77% of the 25%. You do the maths...

A new chapter?

Walking in my local library yesterday, I was impressed by the huge banner, all pink and full of promises, A New Chapter.

Looking at it, you'd think that things couldn't be better where library provision in the city is concerned: there is mention of 2,000 extra library hours, 100,000 extra computer hours, "tailored" mobile services and £1million to be spent on books.

And there is a consultation going, and an equally pink leaflet to complete to give your comments.

The questions are to do with further opening hours ( how many more hours would you like Compton Road library to be open for? Is Monday 9 to 7 good for you or would you like to offer another suggestion?), and with proposed locations for mobile libraries in the area.

Funny how, library CLOSURES are carefully hidden in the document. When I first looked, I couldn't find anything about Richmond Hill library. And I wasn't the only one. The librarian couldn't find anything on our library on the leaflet either!

So I asked for further information, and surprisingly (?) there wasn't any.
I did find the executive report on line, in the LCC website.

And I did find the mention of closures in the "consultation" document: it's on the very top of the second page, literally in small print and it says:

The costs and level of use brings the viability of Richmond Hill, Osmonthorpe and Swarcliffe Libraries into question. We 'd like your views on the proposals bellow.

Ultimately, the "views" asked, are about possible locations for mobile libraries which "could" visit the area, as it is very subtly mentioned ( and that, according to my poor English, means that there is a possibility that they mightn't.)

So please, find some time to visit the library and fill in the questionnaire.
Or you can do it on-line at:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/DTY7NMR

Residents in East End Park and Richmond Hill are used to living in a desert of public services provision: there is no sports' centre, no baths, and soon there will be no library. This is, according to the executive report because our library is underused. It is worth mentioning though, that Richmond Hill library only opens from 10 to 5 two days a week and half a day on Wednesday from 2 to 5, which means that it's no use to those who work or go to college. Still, it is used by the local primary school, by mothers and children, by old people, and by youths after school, if only for a brief period of time.

For me the library is very special: as a mother of small children in the area, it was my first port of call for information, books, printing, computers and more importantly as a place to go, to get out of the house and see other people, to teach the kids to appreciate the value of books and learning.

I know that the new mantra is that "we should all make sacrifices" (although apparently some of us will have to sacrifice more than others) but I also believe that some things, you can't put a price on.

Taking that very valuable service away from us, is bound to backfire:
We live in a poor area, where services are absent, internet use limited and with very little for young people to do.

I would like to paraphrase and old Greek saying for this instance that goes: where a school closes, a prison opens.

I would like to say: if a library closes, s**t happens..