Daniella debate

Debate about Green Mayoral Candidate Daniella Radice on this post story eg by FOX_Joe - “Out to lunch bunch of daydreamers! Living in a bubble would be wonderful, but we don't. The most out of sync with reality 'political' party; in short communists with a slightly better education.”

My response: @ FOX_Joe - "Living in a bubble would be wonderful, but we don't."

Actually we do live in a bubble of sorts - the biosphere on our planet that provides all the resources that sustain our economy and society, has to take in all our wastes and pollutants and is the basis of our lives. Why call the people who plan to live sustainably and fairly in this bubble 'daydreamers' and unrealistic and not those who are squandering finite resources, blighting the world for future generations, building an economy that mainly benefits super-rich, corrupt and unethical bankers and their establishment politician and media friends and not general wellbeing...Your assessement is upside down FOX_Joe. Obviously I'm a green and so support Daniella and her policies but can you deny their rationale?
______________________________________________________

Copies of some further contributions I've made to the debate, which is pretty lively:

@ Richard34 - Daniella is proposing to go much further with devolving power than the current Neighbourhood Partnerships. She advocates creating - and Mayoral working with - democratically elected neighbourhood councils, which of course we dont currently have.

Current transport plans are hardly revolutionary and many aspects of the 'Greater Bristol Bus Network' and bus rapid transit - especially using bendy buses - have rightly been heavily critcised. There's been a lot of talk about public transport improvements in Bristol for decades and we have still got a lot of problems and a long way to go - thus the Greens proposals to create a major transport hub for local bus and train interchange at Plot 6 next to Temple Meads station and to develop the local economy in such a way as to improve local job creation, local shops and community facilities such that the need to travel long distances is cut.

On education Daniella will lobby the government to transfer the secretary of state's powers over free schools and academies to the Mayor, not to the council ie central government dictates are being opposed and local democracy favoured.
______________________________________________________

@ BCFC Finker - ok, still nothing on policies or principles, so no genuine substance to your comments. And dont forget that people will have two votes in the Mayoral election, one for first and one for second preference. People can therefore vote both with their heart and with their head. This may cause some interesting voting patterns, especially with the Lib Dems and Tories struggling due to the persistent failures of the Coalition Govt.
______________________________________________________

“@SouthvilleDav - Greens like Daniella and I have long been campaigning aginst biofuels - they simply aren't green at all - see http://tinyurl.com/88tf85o As for what you say on solar energy, you are absolutely right - and I'd go further and say that we should be investing in solar to grow the industry in this country so we can supply as much as we can for ourselves.
______________________________________________________

@ Richard34 - you are arguing against greater democracy and against democracy being closer to people instead of remote and in the hands of a few eg a single individual as Mayor. Its partly because democracy is not in people's hands in their neighbourhoods that voters have become disillusioned and politicians self-serving and unethical. There's nothing woolly about what Greens are proposing on this as neither you or anyone else have been unclear on what the plans are.

The current bus station is clearly badly located and our whole public transport system needs a redesign, including creating a proper integrated transport hub at Termple Meads, which is beginning to go through a redesign process anyway. We need to be much more ambitious with our integrated transport planning or we will never make a dent in serious problems of congestion, delay, air pollution, carbon emissions...Current plans wont make a dent in these problems and in fact will make some of them worse!!

Thinking that the current education system is 'wonderful' is a very big mistake. Conservatives once told us we needed GCSEs for instance and now have gone full circle to tell us we dont need them we need the old O'levels or similar!! Greens are not just talking about a transfer of power from central government to the Mayor but to the Mayor working in a partnership with neighbourhood councils and the parents, teachers, governors and pupils/students themselves given that the system is for them and their community not for ideologues in any political party, certainly in a remote central government. Lets have some parent, pupil and people power in the system.

Green + Guidance

Congratulations to Daniella Radice, both on her selection as the Green Party candidate for Mayor of Bristol and for producing the most detailed and coherent statement of polices of any candidate to date and a promise of further detail in September. So, you get a Green plus guidance on what she will actually do if elected! Policies announced cover boosting the local economy, protecting and enhancing Bristol's environment, a fairer, more democratic city with power devolved to neighbourhoods, prioritising our health and wellbeing, and more...see Daniella's campaign website http://daniellaformayor.wordpress.com/. Also see local press coverage here and here and Bristol Greens website announcement here.

Speeding = stupid

Interesting how people try to defend speeding when news stories such as this one (Rise in deaths on Bristol's roads) appear - just look at some of the online comments. Of course we should want everyone - all child and adult pedestrians, all cyclists - to use good road sense but no-one should defend speeding or other irrresponsible forms of driving, not least because it contributes to one in every four deaths as a result road collisions (see RoSPA link below). Speeding is unacceptable, period - it is an avoidable cause of death and serious injury if people show some responsibility.

Inappropriate speed contributes to around 13% of all injury collisions, 16% of crashes resulting in a serious injury and 24% of collisions which result in a death. This includes both 'excessive speed', when the speed limit is exceeded but also driving or riding within the speed limit when this is too fast for the conditions at the time (for example, in poor weather, poor visibility or high pedestrian activity).
http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/adviceandinformation/driving/speed/default.aspx

Status quo candidates

Only two Liberal Democrats have been short-listed to become the party's candidate for Bristol's mayoral elections in November (details). Selecting either Simon Cook (right in picture) or Jon Rogers (left in picture) as mayoral candidate would be offering Bristol voters more of what they have already been getting from the council - they are both an intimate part of the way the city has been and is currently run. Bristolians want change and rejected the current system by voting to have an Elected Mayor – and by the criticism of and lack of enthusiasm they have expressed about it for years. Neither, therefore, stands much chance of becoming Mayor. -
The appeal of these two is negative and undemocratic, suggesting that Bristol should continue to be governed as it has been in the past. I voted no to a mayor but also oppose the way the current city council works and what it stands for, so the appeal of Cook or Rogers for me is zero. Now that we have a different system I think people are likely to vote to make the best use of that system and choose a candidate accordingly - neither of these has the vision, policies, profile, standing or stature needed in an elected Mayor.

An endorsement of either Jon Rogers or Simon Cook from Nick Clegg - in Bristol today - would have been the final nail in the lid of the coffin that is the Lib Dem campaign for Mayor of Bristol - and it's already quite firmly nailed down! Clegg is so popular in Bristol that even his own side are calling on him to resign! See story on prominent Lib Dem John Kiely's message to his party leader here.

Limited, limiting Liberals

Bristol's Liberal Democrats have drawn up a shortlist of potential candidates for the role of Bristol mayor – but have refused to say who is on it...(full story here). Not a very open approach from Nick Clegg's party, whose constitution begins by saying' The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society...' !!

I'd like to to see the evidence that backs this statement on the [high on humility!?] Lib Dem MP for Bristol West Stephen Williams too '...my name recognition is incredibly high, and polling we have done shows people have a positive opinion of me in Bristol...'. Be open and release this information Liberal Democrats!!

Drugs discussion

Tory MP Michael Ellis has, as reported in this story, reacted to Danny Kushlik in the way many politicians - across political parties - have reacted on the issue of illegal drugs over many years. Its a shame that he's not more open to new thinking on this matter. Does he not realise that continuing on with more or less the same old, failed attitudes and polices, throwing a lot of - misdirected - money at the problem, is irrational? Politicians need to base their policies on drugs on the evidence, such as this research comparing legal and illegal drugs: http://tinyurl.com/3ao562j

Supplementary voting system for Bristol's Mayoral election

Bristol’s first Elected Mayor (and the city’s first Police Crime Commissioner) will be chosen this November using a voting system called the supplementary vote (though I suspect many Bristol voters are as yet unaware of this due to the very poor level and quality of information that’s been made available). This system means you have votes to cast for two candidates ie you can choose first and second preferences. At the count the electoral authorities start by totaling all the first preference votes. Any candidate achieving over 50% wins, though with many candidates standing – including all the political parties plus independents - this is unlikely to happen. If no-one gets 50% the authorities eliminate all but the top two candidates, and in a second round redistribute all the votes for everybody else by the second preference on the ballot paper.

This means you can vote for your absolute first preference without worrying about wasting your vote because you know they can’t win this time. You have your second preference vote to cast for whichever of the likely top two candidates you least object to being mayor or don’t mind them giving them a go. In Bristol the top two look like being independent candidate George Ferguson and the Labour Party’s Marvin Rees, at least for the present (you could vote for someone else as a second preference or not cast your second vote at all, but then would not affect the result at all).

Here’s the Electoral reform Society guide to the supplementary voting system: http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/supplementary-vote/

Mayoral momentum

George Ferguson was "bowled over" by the response to his mayoral campaign when he held a jamboree in the city (story here). Interesting that George has generated these numbers (500 in the report) and this reported, at least, enthusiam. He's gained some momentum in his campaign and some advantage through declaring his candidacy early on and being the first to send out a leaflet. Despite his Liberal background and pretty obvious broadly liberal approach to politics he is benefitting and will benefit from not being a candidate representing a political party. He also has a decent national standing and can point to a list of achievements that will impress some voters. My question to George however is - where's the beef?...please openly state your principles and convictions in a good deal more detail than you already have. He appears to be pursuing a strategy of trying to win the Mayoral election mostly on the basis of finding out what people want and then saying that this is his policy rather than getting elected because he is openly stating policy convictions. For me he is clearly the main opposition to Labour's candidate Marvin Rees though.

City Deal

The £100-million Bristol Metro train network which will bring massive improvements to local railways is to go ahead with the first services running by 2016. It comes as a result of the City Deal agreed between local council and the Government which was announced yesterday...(more here).

Business rates to be kept in Bristol and used to raise more money for investment is very welcome. Plans to improve the local rail network are also welcome. Lets hope what is planned is effective and efficient. I do think there is a democratic deficit in all this thinking though and would like to see much greater and inbuilt opportunities for public participation, creating better openness and accountability - it wont be sufficient to simply lobby our authorities to use this money in the best way.

Details of the 'City Deal' for Bristol, according to The Post, are:

* A new growth incentive and the economic investment fund, which will allow West of England to keep 100 per cent of growth in business rates over 25 years to invest in projects, allowing authorities to deliver an investment programme worth £1 billion over 30 years.

*  Ten years of major funding allocation for the Greater Bristol Metro; flexible delivery for the Bus Rapid Transit Network which will allow savings to be recycled locally; and new powers over rail planning and delivery.

*— A Public Property Board will manage up to £1 billion of city council assets and an estimated 180 land and property assets to unlock more land for economic growth or housing and to lever in additional investment.

* A city growth hub with up to £2.25 million of government funding which will provide additional support to inward investors. This will be based in the Temple Quarter Enterprise Zone and will work closely with UK Trade and Investment.

* The business community and local enterprise partnership will have more influence in skills provision in the city region, in particular the £114 million Skills Funding Agency funding for Further Education colleges for post-16 provision, to help capture employer demand.

Mother suckers

This story, on some breast-feeding mums 'flash-mob' protest at a Bristol cafe recently has generated significant online debate - including some wildy sexist and discriminatory rubbish from some readers of The Post. Breast milk is cheap, organic and local food - and it is what is best for babies and their mums. Our society should be doing all it can to encourage more breastfeeding of babies - including countering the ignorant and immature comments posted by some on this story who focus their criticism on stereotypes of people rather than on the facts and arguments. If you've got a decent argument why would you resort to unfair tactics instead??

The key, function of breasts is to provide milk for babies (believe it or not!). For tens of thousands of years there was no udder alternative - and those available now are really no match the amazing stuff they provide. See here for more:

http://www.lactivist.net/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breastfeeding

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breastfeeding_in_public

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast

Eco-Bristol?

Bristol will continue with its 'green' plans even though it suffered a Green Capital loss (see story here). One commenter on the story (YourLakeshore)  said "...it is great news that Bristol came 2nd in the whole of Europe - particularly as it had tough competition and Bristol has made it to the final twice. It also presents Bristol as being the green city of the UK..."

If Bristol is the green city of the UK why then is its ecological footprint only 17th best out of 60 in the country (see ranking and figures here)? Why is Bristol's ecological footprint set to rise with new road building, loss of green spaces, increase in population...? Doesn't there need to be a committment to cut this footprint significantly if Bristol is to be credible in its green claims? It is after all 2.9 times bigger than a sustainable level!

Also, its not really about being in competition with every other city in the 'whole of Europe' but only about competing against those who entered - and on criteria still a very long way from genuinely sustainable cities.

Bank on bankers?

To 'bank on' something means being able to expect or rely with confidence on it. Given that: bankers have lied to make them look more secure during the financial crisis and to make a profit (here); and have mis-sold specialist insurance to thousands of small businesses (here); on top of PPI insurance mis-selling, taking huge, fat, undeserved salaries and bonuses, and helping to take our economy and others to the brink...we clearly can't be confident that they operate within a decent ethical code. Our banking system's reputation, integrity and trustworthiness sinks even lower. Culture change is certainly needed if we are to build an economy capable of being sustainable (more here).

Diversity dividends

"There's been a few incidents involving Islamic centres springing up around the city and also more mosques..." says Mickey Bayliss, on the English Defence League (EDL) decision to march in protest in Bristol this summer (see story and comments/debate here). What on Earth makes an Islamic centre springing up, or a few more mosques, 'incidents' ?? Just how does this add up to 'extreme Islamist terrorism' and 'preaching hate and terror' and 'Islamification' which is what the EDL are - apparently - opposed to?? Mr Bayliss reveals his prejudice and what he is really about in his own words, even though in the story he is doing his best to be guarded and 'reasonable'.

One of the defenders of the EDL (torysarecool) posted this comment on the Post story - "The fact is, the EDL simply don't like foreigners changing England and it makes them resent their presence. Who can blame them for thinking that? As others have mentioned, it often feels like foreign people, who speak little of our language and with whom we share few similarities are actively changing our home..."

This country has thousands of years worth of being a place where people from many different countries and of many different ethnic origins have come. Stone age people migrating from the Iberian peninsula and south west France, Celts, Scandinavians, Anglo Saxons, Normans, people from all over the Roman Empire, people from the Caribbean, India, Pakistan...Our home is what it is because of this and our home has always been one that changes over time. Whats the problem??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/England

Stockwood Pete: Disappearing Data: how to rewrite history

Revisiting the webcast of the original meeting, I was surprised to see that it's just been wiped from the public record. It seems to have gone the way of many (but by no means all) BCC meeting webcasts over a year old. So the act of dodgy decision making is now kept from public gaze. Only the bare Minutes of the meeting are there – and of course they tell next to nothing of the whole story...

...It's not just webcasts that disappear from the record. For the last year or so, the 'Public Forum' Statements submitted to council meetings have been disappearing into a black hole – or, at best, a 'Minute Book' somewhere in the recesses of the council house.

Stockwood Pete: Disappearing Data: how to rewrite history

BRT = Busting relative tranquility

More news from the public enquiry into bus rapid transit (full story here - and large extract below). Cycling expert Mike Ginger, the Civic Society and Sustrans former boss John Grimshaw are spot on with their comments.

Experts and representatives of cycling organisations have suggested that the buses would put off cyclists and many objectors have focussed on the harbourside as a key battleground.


In documents submitted to the enquiry, Mike Ginger, a former council Cycle Project team leader, said:

"The calm and uncluttered ambience of this unique and historic harbour setting will be shattered resulting in a qualitative reduction in traveller and visitor experience."

He also questioned the general effect on cycling that the new buses would cause.

He said: "It is reasonable to argue that some existing cycling and walking demand will be 'choked off' as conditions deteriorate.

"If cycling demand falls by say a quarter, this would represent a health benefit cost of £8 million euros [£6.5 million] over 30 years."

In a separate document produced by the Bristol Civic Society, objectors said:

"It is proposed that both dedicated BRT buses and regular buses run along the road that separates the new M Shed from the future Umberslade development on WappingWharf.

"We question the desirability of running large vehicles across the new southern entrance of the recently opened M shed."

Finally John Grimshaw, the former Sustrans boss who helped to found the Bristol to Bath cycle path, submitted his own suggestions.

He said: " The proposals cause severance and delay to existing routes, fail to enhance cycling or to provide a continuous route parallel to the BRT, and would, in my view, comprise a worse situation than walkers and cyclists experience at present.

"Overall the BRT provides almost no new benefits for cyclists, whilst at the same time causing considerable severance, delay and inconvenience to existing routes."

He added: "It cannot be desirable to promote an order, largely for the benefit of out-of-town travellers, at the expense of local people travelling by the most sustainable of methods - walking and cycling."

Council costs

The city council could close more than 20 of its office buildings in a long-term plan to save £40 million. The shake-up could mean a new lease of life for a former bonded warehouse next to the River Avon, which could revitalise a neglected corner of Bristol near the Cumberland Basin. (see here). Councillors should be asking a large number of questions about the rather bold statement of claimed benefits of this proposal and they should especially scrutinise these kind of figures/estimates:

 "The cost of the offices shake-up would be an estimated £70 million, with money borrowed at preferential rates over many years. But the council's treasury officials believe that within 15 years they will have recouped all the costs. And within 25 years the scheme would deliver an overall saving of nearly £40 million."

Could you not radically change the way the council works and use far fewer buildings in many different ways? Have other options been fully explored? Is this the best option? My concern is the £70 million cost and whether this would stay at £70 million and whether it would be paid back as officials estimate.

Surely not a decision for the council but for the Mayor elected in November in any case.

Trains and planes

Improving the local rail network - great (see story here) Very consistent with cutting carbon emissions by at least 80% from 1990 levels by 2050, as outlined in the Climate Change Act. However, the Govt then faces in completely the opposite direction by supporting an expanding Bristol Airport - ten million passengers a year will increase not cut carbon emissions (as well as depriving our local and national economy of money and support for local businesses when people spend abroad instead of here).

BBC News - Rio: Worth the effort?

BBC News - Rio: Worth the effort?

Rio green summit dismissed as 'hoax that achieved nothing' - Green Living - Environment - The Independent

Rio green summit dismissed as 'hoax that achieved nothing' - Green Living - Environment - The Independent

George Monbiot – How “Sustainability” Became “Sustained Growth”

George Monbiot – How “Sustainability” Became “Sustained Growth”

Tackling transport

Copy of my comment on this story, trying to bring Bristol City Council Cabinet Member and Cllr Gary Hopkins (pictured) back reality through proper transport performance indicators for our city:

@ gary_hopkins - can I remind you that we need to see positive transport outcomes in Bristol eg traffic reduction, significantly lower congestion and delay, much lower air pollution, carbon emissions falling in line with what best science says is needed and in line with the Climate Change Act...We simply aren't seeing significant improvements in the major performance indicators. I also remind you that part of the current transport plans includes building new roads - hardly likely to produce the transport outcomes I've indicated. If you have solid evidence to the contrary then I'd like to hear it.

Cllr Hopkins reply simply made no comments at all about traffic reduction - and no comments at all about carbon emissions. On congestion he said, rather lamely, ‘...conjestion [his spelling] and delays are down but not by as much as they should be because the dividends of these are for the time being being swallowed by First instead of being passed on to customers.’ This appears not to be about overall congestion and delays but in any case admits there is no significant reduction.

On air pollution he admits there is still a problem but that the European green capital assessment rates Bristol as best (!!!). In his words, ‘Air pollution is still a problem but it was interesting that the technical assesment for European green capital rated us best of any entrant on that area. The BRT will run on non fossil fuel and will make a significant contribution.’

Green capital assessment rates Bristol’s air pollution as best! This only goes to show how low their standards are. No evidence in his comment to back the claim that BRT will make a 'significant contribution'. It’s mere assertion therefore.

Cllr Hopkin’s denied it was mere assertion and gave some additional waffle and opinion but did not actually give any data or reference to data to back his assertions. It’s note-able that he simply did not comment at all on traffic reduction and on carbon emissions from transport which I specified along with air pollution and congestion as performance indicators. What forecasting/modelling has been done that shows that current transport plans will produce significant reductions in these? Does Cllr Hopkins have this data??

What Cllr Hopkins seems unwilling to recognise and acknowledge is that key transport outcomes such as overall traffic flow, air pollution, congestion and delay and carbon emissions are very unlikely to significantly improve under current transport plans such as GBBN and BRT with its associated road building. In fact some of them may well get worse. An RAC Foundation report in 2011 said there will be four million more cars will be on the roads in the next 25 years. It goes on to forecast a 43% rise in traffic volume by 2035. Department for Transport figures show that by 2035 traffic will rise by nearly 50% and delays more than 50%on average (more here). To make real and lasting improvements realities have first to be acknowledged.

Some useful information on transport in Bristol here.

Decision before evidence?

Bristol City Council rejected the chance to build a tram system despite figures showing it would be cheaper than the proposed new Bus Rapid Transit link, it has been claimed....Sustraco claimed that Mr Kent [Bristol City Council Cabinet Member for Transport, pictured left] announced at the end of the meeting that the council had already decided "before the meeting" that the bus option would be chosen. On returning from the meeting, Sustraco officials said they found they had been sent e-mails with a 34-page report attached. The report, which Sustraco said was written before the meeting, detailed the decision without considering evidence submitted in the meeting...(full story here)

Only one conclusion can be drawn from this, if what Sustraco say is true. Tim Kent and the Lib Dem Cabinet running Bristol made a decision involving many millions of pounds without considering the all the evidence. Kent met with Sustraco knowing that holding the meeting was pointless given that decisions had already been made! Unless Sustraco's description is shown to be wayward, this is irrational, unreasonable and deceptive behaviour whatever the merits or not of light rail vs BRT.

Marvin for Mayor??

LABOUR have picked Marvin Rees to be the party's candidate in the race to become Bristol's first elected mayor, (see story here). Almost no indication, again, of any vision or policy positions however. Marvin Rees suffers from the disadvantages of: representing a party that has already referred to using the Mayor as a political weapon; having no national standing; and not much of a profile in Bristol.

He does have the advantage of not being Peter Hammond, Helen Holland, Dan Norris or Kelvin Blake! Bristol Labour members thought so much of their current leader, former leader, a former MP and former councillor that they – rightly in my view - rejected them. I've seen Marvin Rees is a few debates and he comes across quite personably, but has no gravitas and has so far expressed little or nothing on what he’d actually do.

Sustainability summit sucks

UN talks on sustainable development are encountering disputes, delays and diplomatic wrangling, days before world leaders arrive to sign a new agreement.

The talks, in Rio de Janeiro, are aimed at putting the world economy on a more sustainable path, helping people out of poverty while protecting nature.

Yet developing countries have walked out over money, and the presence of Palestinians has brought complications.

Campaigners say there is little hope of momentous changes being agreed here...(full story)

Bendy buses

I'm an opponent of the current Bus Rapid Transit plans but as a keen advocate of communal, public transport I'd like to see investment in BOTH the Bristol bus and rail system (in addition to walking and cycling) and in combining all of these smoothly (see story and comments here).

Light rail is just about the most energy efficient form of motorised transport and it is likely to be more successful in getting car drivers to switch modes. However, it should not be a matter of rail vs bus, though I acknowledge that there is only so much money being made available.

FOSBR are right to oppose BRT, not least because of unsuitable routes and new roads,  but I'm not so sure about all their reasoning. The case I'd make against bendy buses is that they have potential problems with: insufficient effective motive power; slower speed and acceleration due to the extra weight; overheating leading to stalling, or even a fire if diesel fuelled; in crowded areas with narrow streets and tight turns the accident rate may exceed than conventional buses. Bendy buses are supposed to be highly fuel efficient but this must be dependent on the city and the system they are running on and so in practice I have doubts that they will be more efficient in operation than double deckers here in Bristol. Mind you some parts of FOSBRs rail alternative are non-starters - a tunnel under St Mary Redcliffe is both impractical and likely to be far too costly.

There is a problem with money availability if we are to invest in both buses and rail. Yet we need to invest several times what is available for BRT if we are to make a serious dent in Bristol’s traffic and traffic-related problems. It will be interesting to see how the Mayor elected in November approaches this. There is a problem with our congested roads because we need to make the existing bus system more effective and efficient and extensive, if we are genuinely trying to meet targets such as absolute traffic reduction and significant lowering of pollution - so are we willing to make a decent number of existing roads car and lorry free?? And would a Mayor be willing to bite this bullet?

More thoughts on sustainable transport here:

Leadership logic???

Bristol's elected Mayor would be one of the most powerful figures in Britain according to Cities Minister Greg Clark . I doubt that very much. (full story)

Never saw it as logical to have an election for a Mayor without knowing beforehand what powers exactly the office would have. If the Govt are saying the decision can be taken before the Mayor is elected this November why couldn't that have been done before the vote in May??

Arguably if you not going to annouunce the powers of the Mayoral office from the off then its logical to wait to hear the views and ideas of the person elected before finally deciding on them. The Govt argue that Bristol's current local council leadership is unsatisfactory but is quite happy to negotiate with them the powers of the person that will take leadership away from them! Huh???? 

Pure party politics

"...make a successful Labour mayor a weapon in the party's battle to win back lost seats at the next general election..." (see report, Labour's contenders slug it out to be mayoral candidate)

It makes my heart sink to read this as one of the themes agreed on by Labour's mayoral candidates. The idea of the Mayor as an electoral weapon is repugnant. The focus should be on solving Bristol's problems and creating opportunities for Bristol, not maximising party advantage. Party advantage as a spin off of genuine success yes, but as something to be stated and sought from the beginning no.

Festival flim-flam

"It demonstrates that Bristol has credibility in green issues....What the festival does is make it real for people." says Big Green Week organiser Darren Hall (here)
*
Bristol will have credibility on green issues (in fact all issues are green issues) when it can demonstrate significant progress on tackling the key issues: horrendous traffic congestion; ongoing air pollution problems; carbon footprint many times higher than is sustainable; ecological footprint that will grow with loss of green spaces and green belt, new road building, rising population...; poor public transport services; low level of economic self-reliance, especially food and energy security; high levels of inequality; poor levels of participation in key matters such as voting in local elections....

That it is thought that a festival is what will make Bristol's green credibility real speaks volumes. A festival on its own is mere flim-flam, nonsense and humbug. When are genuinely and significantly green outcomes going to happen in place of the tinkering and public relations ?? After all people have been burbling their greenwash for decades now.

Leadership lark

Head of Big Green Week,Paul Rainger  has been quoted as saying, "Bristol is an incredible place. Whether it's grassroots environmentalism, or robust political leadership, Bristol's brand of sustainability is unlike any other."  (see the story 'Bristol's best place for green electricity, says power firm' here). However, Bristol's people dont generally think we have robust political leadership and the head of Big Green Week is therefore out of touch. Many have been critical of the council for years, the turnout in local elections is low - and we have just rejected the current council leadership in favour of an Elected Mayor, albeit on a low turnout.

Also,  its not going to be hard to be the 'greenest city in the country when it comes to environmentally-friendly electricity' because the general standard at the moment is very poor. Many cities simply dont have much green electricity generation at all.

By the way its not clear to me that a fair comparison has been made by Good Energy given the figures quoted in the story. They just give a raw figure for the postcode area not green electricity per head of population or similar.

Boxing clever?

Encouraging children to take up boxing could prevent a repeat of last summer's riots, a Bristol MP says.
Charlotte Leslie...said hopping into the ring was "as close as you'll get to a silver bullet" for harnessing the pent-up frustration of teenagers...(full story)

I wouldn't go as far as to say its a silver bullet but I do think Tory MP Charlotte Leslie's argument that boxing is a good means of  personal development for young people is a sound one. Professional boxing is badly in need of a reforming shake up in terms of its safety, money involved, management and the behaviour of boxers. However, amateur boxing, like many other sporting activities, can if properly delivered be a good activity that people can do together in their community. It requires participants to respect and work within a set of rules. It means those taking part get into a routine for training and planning. It promotes physical health and a focussed mental attitude. Surely it is reasonable to assume that these things help to develop greater social responsibility?

Jubilee've it ?

                                 http://www.republic.org.uk/index.php

Businessman Mayor ?

A BRISTOL businessman is the latest candidate to put himself forward in the race to become the city's first elected mayor. Andy Thorne, managing director of Thorne Security, the long-established locksmith and security firm...(full story)

Businessman Mr Thorne talks about waste, taxpayers money, effciency and how Bristol is not developing because planning gets in the way. This is clearly a right of centre agenda, though what he says is very light indeed on indicating any clear policies. He does not talk about education, transport, social services, housing, environmental quality etc as priorities, which perhaps tells a story.
_________________________________________________________________________

Not sure what Mr Thorne would make of it but I've just sent in this suggestion for adding to the Manifesto for Bristol....Surely the manifesto needs to say something about sustainability? How about including this, which attempts a reasonably complete and operational definition of sustainability, in the vision: Develop a city that: respects environmental limits; builds strong, resilient local communities; meets city needs now and in the future; has a focus on both local and global fairness and equality; strives for ever greater resource efficiency; replaces finite resource use with well managed renewable resources; uses health, wellbeing and quality of life as the indicator of progress; works through an evidence-based, reasoned, systems-thinking approach.

Steiner and science

A group of parents and teachers have launched a campaign to create a new free school. The Bristol Steiner Free School group announced...that it would bid next February for government approval of the project. Free schools are state-funded but independent of council control and set up in response to demand from groups of parents....[The group said the school would have] a strong academic element, specialising in environmental sciences...The Steiner School movement emerged from the ideas of early 20th century educationalist Rudolf Steiner. (full story).

Steiner (pictured) claimed direct experience of the 'spiritual' world. He was a philosopher, occultist, social reformer, architect, esotericist. and founded Anthroposophy. Anthoposophy claims to investigate the spiritual world and believes it can attain precise and clear conclusions in the same way that science concludes about the physical world.

I've been an active green for 30 yrs and I teach environmental sciences  (which is simply the proper application of scientific methods to the environment). I do not support Steiner's ideas or Steiner Free Schools and would point to the British Humanist Association concerns about them (see http://www.humanism.org.uk/news/view/1042 ).

Like others commenting on this Post report I can’t see how Steiner's ideas are at all consistent with modern science and its methods and so I am as concerned about Steiner Free Schools setting up with public money and support as I am about certain other kinds of Free School with a significant ideology behind them instead of openness, questioning and reason.

Background on Steiner:
http://www.rudolfsteinerweb.com/  and  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Steiner  

Love the local

Bedminster has been named as the region’s only successful bidder in the first round of the Government’s ‘Portas Pilots’ – an initiative to get TV retail guru Mary Portas to help revitalise town centres....‘Bemmie’, as it’s affectionately known in the city, will now get a £100,000 grant and the expertise of Mary Portas and the project team (more here). Might as well have given Bedminster a bag of peanuts because that's all that £100,000 is. The focus on the issue of local shopping areas, and high streets, and the availability of some expertise, is welcome, provided it goes beyond govt public relations - but the amount of money is really tiny. What's really needed is a strategic, genuinely participative approach, backed by appropriate amounts of money which starts to shift the whole economic emphasis towards the local, regional and national economy and de-emphasising the global economy which is the source of so many problems.

Torchure

On the journey of the Olympic torch I'm in firm agreement with Post commenter LeighWoods1 who said 'One thing, closing one of the main arteries to the city [Bristol] for what is essentially the procession of a large zippo lighter is a huge waste of resources and I would like someone to assess the impact upon our economy of this silly and pointless exercise.' (more here)

And as for the massive news coverage of this torch - we have weeks and weeks more of it to go yet and its already very tiresome and wasteful. Its torchure.

@ raverbaby1 - "finding all the negative comments a bit shocking really - can i assume you all feel we should have disregarded history and tradition..."

No, just wanting a decent sense of proportion, perspective, good sense and a proper sense of priorities. Many people have gone far over the top with claims about what staging the Olympics can do for our country - its something that is easily said but very hard to demonstrate historically and with hard facts, especially economic ones

@ Bristoldjsuk - “I am excited for the olympics and the sports etc, however the torch spectacle is a bit odd. The corporate band wagon and advertising is becoming increasingly tedious and I feel it's detracting from the actual point of the olympics, the sports. It's still months away, yet we are being hyped into a frenzy as if it's tomorrow..."

Yes, absolutely. I'm dead keen on the Olympics but purely as a sporting event. It shows us the excellence that can be achieved by human efforts - if we have the motivation and discipline we can all harness our talents, sometimes with support, sometimes because we are not supported. We may gain as people from the example and experience of this. What I dont buy and am opposed to is the weeks and months of hype, the waste of resources, the possibility of overall economic gain due to staging the event, the sponsorhip and corporatism - and the misplaced nationalism.

Nuclear no no

No-one would disagree (would they?) that burying waste from today's nuclear power stations leaves a very big set of social, economic and environmental problems for many generations to come. Since sustainability is about dealing with risks and costs now and not passing problems to future generations it therefore follows that burying nuclear waste is inherently unsustainable. The following question alone demonstrates this: with waste that can be active for thousands of yrs how can it be possible to guarantee that the institutions needed would be stable beyond periods which have so far proved to be whole lifetimes of civilisations?

Despite the logic above the UK plans to build more nuclear power stations (if the huge economic cost obstacles can be overcome) and the '...search for an underground storage site for high-level nuclear waste is likely to go ahead in Cumbria after a poll showed residents are in favour.

In Copeland, the local authority area encapsulating Sellafield [pictured], 68% of people backed entering formal talks with government on hosting the repository.

Across Cumbria as a whole, 53% are in favour and 33% opposed...'
(full report here).

Petty politics

The mud has begun to fly in the race to become Bristol's first elected mayor, says this Post report.Where is the substance in this bit of local politics? Nothing that Bristol Labour Party are saying is evidence based. Only Mr Ferguson knows exactly why he resigned when he did  - and I have to say, as someone who is not one of his fans, that he has always been an independent person.
*
Purely personal criticism as in this story is hardly going to take the debate forward at all. Its policies and leadership that should be the focus. This may be a problem for months yet though because no potential candidate is talking much about policies at all !!

Ferguson favourite

Architect George Ferguson has emerged as the early favourite to become Bristol’s first elected mayor. He is quoted by Ladbrokes at 2/1...(full Post story here).
George Ferguson is a pretty canny operator. He does have a decent chance of becoming the first Mayor of Bristol, though I don’t see how the odds make much sense at this very early stage. Arguably he already has a national standing which no other potential candidate currently in the picture can equal.

It will be interesting to see the policies George and his team come up with - and what the Lib Dem position on selecting a candidate is. Other independent candidates may emerge and the Greens may put someone up too.

Some background on George Ferguson here and here.

Stop BRT2

Passing on details of this site and campaign. I'm preparing some emails to send to the relevant cabinet members and councillors asking questions and opposing the scheme.

We want BRT2 stopped because

It will not achieve its primary goal of addressing Bristol's transport problems and needs.
It will not achieve its goal because it is a flawed plan, badly designed, too expensive, and will have adverse effects on the city, the environment, and local people.

STOP BRT2 | . . . there are better ways

Leadership lite

Architect George Ferguson has launched his campaign to become Bristol's first elected mayor.
In a speech at the Tobacco Factory in Southville last night, he told supporters he would stand as an independent candidate campaigning under the banner Bristol First.Although he did not outline policies he would introduce...(full Post story here).

George Ferguson has some strong views and therefore already has policies in mind I'm sure. That he is not putting them forward now is, I suggest, part of his electoral strategy. He is perhaps intending to appear to be all things to all people. If he wants to lead the city then lets see him begin this process by telling us where he stands and what principles or rules will guide his decisions  ie give us some indicative policies and show that there is some substance and weight to his candidacy.
________________________________________________

Snippet of the debate I'm involved in on the Post website:

@PJ1979 '" the election is in November, so the policy issue should be parked until Aug/Sept.
Also what is wrong with a focus group"

Hmmm...little indication of any policies at all when you've gone to the trouble of appearing in the media, delivering a speech and launching your candidacy. No - its clear that if he is to lead all of Bristol he should give us a much better indication of what principles and rules will direct his decisions. The thing is that George Ferguson does have policy positions - he is a former Liberal, he's been a councillor, he's contested a general election, he is a director of the think tank Demos, he's been involved in a number of developments...in other words he occupies a distinct political position but is saying little about it. Why? Well, I assume its the political tactic he's chosen to use.

As for focus groups - they are a selection of group members. They may exclude some members of the community and not be representative. They require proper facilitation and serving - and can be time consuming. There are quite a few ways in which they can be manipulated to get the outcome favoured all along, or at least to get an outcome that is not hostile - surely the decade of Blair/Brown government taught us that. I'm not opposed to consultation but it has to be genuine.

Bristol Blogger

The Bristol Blogger is back, according to this post here. I do hope that this is the case and on a similar basis to the previous excellent, educational and entertaining Bristol Blogger site. With ongoing shennanigans on the council, all sorts of strife in the country and around the continent - and the first ever Mayoral elections due to take place this November, including one George Ferguson as one of the contenders - surely the pot is in great need of stirring?

The Bristol Blogger | My name is Legion: for we are many.

Carbon con

Work has restarted on the groundbreaking "green" homes project at Hanham Hall on the outskirts of Bristol... Developer Barratt Homes won the contract to build the pioneering one, two, three, four and five-bed homes which are expected to set the construction industry's benchmark for "green" living... so they meet the new 2016 Zero Carbon Building Regulation standards...(full story)

Thing is that the houses, whilst having many interesting features, won’t actually be zero carbon. Now, you'd think that 'zero carbon' is pretty clear cut - but what the Govt have done is change the definition of 'zero carbon' to make the standard easier to meet!! (See here and here for some of the past debate).

HCA head of area David Warburton said: "It has been our long-held ambition to deliver an exemplar, energy efficient community at Hanham Hall, which local people will be proud to live in.

"This is now one of two projects of its kind in the country. It is great news that local people will soon see evidence of the bold vision for the project coming to life when work progresses on the delivery of a fantastic new modern and sustainable community at Hanham Hall."

I certainly want to see truly sustainable homes being built but they won’t be if they are not zero carbon. And when I read comments like the one above I also wonder whether they have given much thought to social sustainability, including making homes affordable and having a decent mixed community and facilities etc? Economic, social and environmental factors must work together for proper sustainability to be achieved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_neutrality

Greenery = healthy

More evidence that green spaces are good for you (see here). More access to green spaces means: less liklihood of developing asthma or allergies; lower levels of stress; greater likelihood of a more active lifestyle; greater opportunities to mentally and physically engage with the natural world. Promoting good health was always one of the key reasons why Bristol should be protecting and increasing its green spaces not flogging them - and protecting its green belt from inappropriate developments like the proposed South Bristol Ring Road/Link and the Bristol City stadium (picture shows Ashton Vale green belt)  .

"Urbanisation is a relatively recent phenomenon, and for most of our time we have been interacting in an area that resembles what we now call the natural environment," he said.

"Urbanisation can be seen as a lost opportunity for many people to interact with the natural environment and its biodiversity, including the microbial communities."

While it was not possible to reverse the global trend of urbanisation, he said that there were a number of options.

"Apart from reserving natural areas outside of urban areas, I think it is important to develop city planning that includes green spaces, green belts and green infrastructure," Dr Hanski suggested

Nuclear liability

The eye-watering expense of nuclear power | Jonathon Porritt | Environment | guardian.co.uk

The coalition wants us to depend more and more on nuclear power, but quite simply, it is too expensive to be able to deliver...

Democracy dead?

Bristol has said yes to an Elected Mayor - just  - 53% Yes, 47% No, with the majority a mere 5152 votes, see here. Just one person in ten voting at worst and one in three voting at best is a very worrying statistic however (see here). Everyone involved in any way in politics and outside it should be thinking hard about what can be done to change things and get people enthused about and involved in the decisions that affect their lives and those of others.

I’d like to see whoever gets elected as the first Mayor of Bristol commit themselves to consulting the people directly on a lot more issues. The technology now exists to make this easy and cheap to do eg via laptop or mobile...

If the numbers voting stay low or decrease further perhaps we should make voting compulsory? I'd be happy to see this, provided ballot papers had a box with 'none of the above' where voters could put their cross. As it is people are entitled not to vote and that's our democracy - though problems of legitimacy must arise as the numbers voting fall.

If 'none of the above' was an option we'd have to decide what would happen if that option won the election though!

Verdant Vale

Here are some sites which demonstrate well the value of the greenery around Bristol. Please take a look - and support campaigns to protect green spaces from inappropriate development. http://www.saveashtonvale.co.uk/

http://www.ashtonvalewildlife.co.uk/

http://www.ashtonvaleheritage.co.uk/

http://sacredspring.wordpress.com/