Mary Reid

I believe strongly in the role of opposition in a democracy. Which is why I applaud the actions of Edward Davey in holding his ground during the debate on the European Treaty. When the Speaker refused to allow the House of Commons to debate the Liberal Democrat amendment, Ed protested vehemently and was asked to leave.

You can see the BBC article on this here, and Ed's own account of of what happened, and why, on his website.

It is the role of an opposition party to challenge the government, ask questions, dig into the detail, and where appropriate propose alternative solutions. And this is equally true in local government.

All this explains why I was shocked last evening by the Conservative approach to Budget Council. They did not behave as a responsible opposition at all.  They did not deal with any of the detail in the Budget that we proposed. True, they did make a number of speeches, but they were filled with broad phrases about 'reducing bureaucracy' and 'cutting costs' without pointing to anything that could help them achieve these.

It gets worse ...

The draft Budget was released at the end of January. It is a very substantial document running to about 100 pages and covered the proposed budget of over £100 million and its rationale.

The opposition councillors have as much access to senior officers as those on the administration. And yet it appears they did not ask for briefings from the directorate heads on the impact of any savings in the proposed Budget, or for any detailed explanations.

The proposals are subjected to scrutiny before they come to Budget Council. The Scrutiny Committee is run by the Conservative Shadow Executive, and they met on 5th February. They can call on any officers they like to help them sift through the document, and you would expect the meeting to be pretty lengthy.

It took exactly 45 minutes.

At Budget Council last evening it was clear that many of the Conservative speakers did not understand the proposals. Some referred to items in last year's budget as though they were in this one. We heard speeches on all kinds of subjects, including one, rather bizarrely, on honouring service personnel returning from Iraq (certainly not a budget issue).

And to cap it all they did not put forward an alternative Budget. This is the second year running that the Conservatives have refused to put forward any alternative budget proposals, but I can never remember it happening before, whatever political party was in control.

Indeed, there have been plenty of occasions in the past when opposition proposals have been incorporated into a budget, thus gaining support across the parties. So why didn't the Conservatives propose anything at all?

Maybe because it was a very tough Budget to achieve. Cuts of £4.5million had to be made. The Conservatives know that any specific proposals would come back to haunt them. On our side we had to bite the bullet, and make some reductions that we would really have preferred not to do.

And the opposition simply opted out.

....Government webpage ever

Check it out quickly before they put something sensible up!

I've just received the latest newsletter from the local Police Safer Neighbourhoods team for Chessington, Hook and Malden Rushett.  It's left me feeling very optimistic about crime levels in our community.

In response to what people said at the last public meeting, the Police have been targetting anti-social drivers, with the clever use of speed guns and automatic number plate recognition.  They have also carried out two drugs raids, as well as individual arrests for supply or possession. 

I was particularly interested in the Primary Youth Forum set up by the team - the junior version of the Youth Forum for older young people. The Primary Youth Forum is made up of representatives from each of the primary schools in the area and the children were given cameras to go about and record the good and bad things about the area. When they reported back, the Police worked on the issues with our Neighbourhod Rangers and other agencies.

The next Public Meeting for our local Safer Neighbourhoods team is on Tuesday 4th March, at 7.30pm at Coppard Gardens. Do go along if you want to hear the latest news from the Police and join in the discussions about local issues.

This meeting is for people living in the two wards of Chessington South and Chessington North & Hook. (If you're not sure which ward you live in go to the Council website and type your postcode into the box on the left). Unfortunately I can't attend this time.

The Police distribute the newsletter as widely as possible, but can't deliver it to every door. If you don't usually get a copy then contact me and I'll email it to you.

If you'd like to talk with them, in strictest confidence, about drug supply, motor vehicle crime, or indeed anything else that is bothering you, then call 020 8721 2001.

That number can also be used to report minor crimes and problems (not emergencies, of course, for which you call 999). It diverts to the team's mobile when someone is available, and to the answerphone otherwise. Do leave a message if you get the answerphone, because they will get back to you.

The campaign to save post offices in the Borough is very active.

Edward Davey MP joined Ian (on left) and lots of supporters outside the threatened post office in Hook Rise South.

Sign the petition here!

Most of us carry identification of one sort or another with us - driving licence, work ID card, passport, membership cards - so what is different about the National ID card proposed by the Labour Government?

American and European friends have been surprised that I am so against the proposals; after all, they've had such cards for many years.

But don't be lulled by the term "ID card". It's not the card that's the problem - it's the huge database behind it. This database will hold very large amounts of data about each person, and will include biometric data such as fingerprints, iris scans or DNA analysis. It will have the capability of linking with educational, police and health records.

And don't be taken in by the assertion that you've got nothing to worry about if you're a good citizen - that assumes that the systems are 100% secure.

There are basically two problems associated with the security of this data - fraud and incompetence.

Fraud, because thousands of public servants  will have legimitate access to the data. Some of these will no doubt be tempted to sell the data illegally or use it themselves for ID theft or blackmail.

Incompetence, because we cannot trust a civil service that has already 'lost' sensitive data on half the population of the UK, and not in just one isolated incident. Security systems always have their weaknesses, often human rather than electronic, and at some point it is inevitable that the weaknesses will be exposed.

If you agree with me then do sign the petition against national ID cards.

Watch Nick Clegg on this - he says he will refuse to have an ID card, even if it means he will go to court.

My "Save our Back Gardens" petition was discussed at the Development Control Committee yesterday. I'm very pleased that it received full support from all the members, across the political parties.

The main point I made was that Kingston's planning policies are not strong enough to stand up against all applications, especially when they go to appeal.

Character Area Studies could help enormously by defining what kinds of development would be acceptable and what would be unacceptable in a given area.

My particular concern is to protect the suburbs built in the 1920s and 1930s which, so far, are not deemed worthy of conservation area status.

The first thought by the committee members was to pass a formal motion to establish a presumption against back garden and backland development.  The planning officers responded by saying that this could feed into Kingston's draft Local Development Framework (that is, the local planning policies) but wouldn't become operational until 2010.

That's quite a while to wait. So the committee asked instead for a fuller report at their next meeting, which would look in depth at the processes for making changes to planning policies. They also asked for it to explain Character Area Studies and how they are being developed in the Borough.

The petition reads:

Suburban back gardens are currently treated as industrial brownfield sites for planning purposes. As a result developers are purchasing houses and back gardens in the Royal Borough and then submitting plans for housing at much higher densities. Decisions by the local Council to refuse planning permission are often overturned by the Planning Inspector in Bristol.

1. We believe that back gardens are important social and ecological green corridors that should be protected from development.

2. We support the Council's policy of opposing backland developments.

3. We will resist offers from developers to buy our homes and gardens.

You've probably heard that one fifth of all the Post Offices in London are to be closed.

Of these six are in the Royal Borough. They are:

• Surbiton Park, 62 Surbiton Road, Kingston KT1 2HT
• Norbiton Common, 240 Kingston Road, New Malden KT3 3RN
• Burlington Road, 82 Burlington Road, New Malden KT3 4NU
• Plough Green, 380 Malden Road, Worcester Park KT4 7NL
• Hook Rise, 311 Hook Rise South, Surbiton KT6 7LS
• Chestnut Grove, 127 Richmond Road, Kingston KT2 5BX

Needless to say, Liberal Democrats are totally opposed to these closures - Post Offices are key centres in any community, and are particularly important for pensioners. The Government should be finding more uses for them, not removing them from our urban villages.

Edward Davey has already achieved success by opposing the closure of the Post Office on Tolworth Broadway. He is now campaigning to save the five threatened Post Offices in his constituency (the first five in the list). Please join in and sign the petition.

Contact Susan Kramer MP about the Chestnut Grove Post Office.

I suppose we are quite lucky here in the southern end of the Royal Borough, because we are rarely disturbed by planes overhead. We used to be able to set our clocks by Concorde every Tuesday morning, but now that has gone over the rainbow it is remarkably peaceful around here.

My worry is that the peace may not last for much longer. Many of us objected to Terminal 5 at Heathrow, because we knew it would inevitably lead to proposals for a new runway. But we were constantly being told by the Government that Heathrow had to expand or it would lose its top place amongst the world's airports.

I never quite understood the argument. Heathrow is the Clapham Junction of the air - not so much a destination but more of a hub. A huge proportion of the planes that arrive at Heathrow disgorge people who are simply transferring to other flights out of the UK. The only benefit these passengers bring to London's economy is some additional local employment and the profit from airport fees. In contrast the planes pollute the atmosphere and make life in the flight paths unbearable.

I don't mind at all if Frankfurt or Dubai, or wherever, positions itself as the prime transfer point for the world's air travellers.

Now the London Assembly has produced a report which says much the same. For once I agree with Ken Livingstone, and his opposition to the expansion of Heathrow, but then Brian Paddick and Boris Johnson are equally opposed to it.

I met three of these young women twice in the space of 24 hours, and on both occasions I was hugely impressed by their ability to communicate to an audience.

Last week I was asked to judge the Kingston stage of the "Youth Speaks" Public Speaking Competition. This was the local level of a competition staged throughout the country by branches of Rotary. Tiffin Girls entered two successful teams, both of which then went on to the District semi-finals.

So on Wednesday I was once again in the judge's chair. Quite properly, I was not allowed to judge the sections that included the Tiffin teams, but I watched them perform with remarkable poise and clarity. One of the teams got through to the next stage, the District final, so good luck to Sarah Hollinshead, Lilli McGeehan and Emma Varley for tonight.

But it was a pleasant surprise to meet up with some of them at the Kingston Chamber of Commerce Business Breakfast at the Chessington Holiday Inn yesterday. As well as being very proficient public speakers, they are also key members of an innovative Young Enterprise company, Estilo. They want to promote Finance education for young people - and they were not talking about how to manage pocket money, but rather the workings of the Stock Exchange and other financial institutions. They have already developed an excellent website called The Share Exchange - do have a look at it to see the real quality of their work so far.

Update on yesterday's posting about Ken Livinsgtone. The London Mayor has now suspended his adviser, Lee Jasper, while police investigations are going on.

See BBC News for more about this story.

I've just seen Ken Livingstone on the news telling the elected GLA members that they are a bunch of "sanctimonious hypocrites". Assembly Chair Sally Hamwee asked him, very calmly, to treat people with respect, and he shouted that they didn't deserve respect.

The London Assembly was then suspended.

And what was that all about?

For some weeks a story has been emerging about Lee Jasper. Jasper is employed as a senior civil servant in the role of equalities adviser to the Mayor.  Substantial grants - about £2.5million in total - have been made by the London Development Agency (Livingstone's business arm) to organisations that Jasper is personally involved with. The claim is that some of these organisations have apparently done nothing in return for the cash. Where has it gone?

You can read the background story in the Evening Standard and you can play the BBC news item from this page. 

Livingstone claims that this concern is being kept alive because of the forthcoming Mayoral election. Well, frankly, yes: the voters of London need to know whether Livingstone and Jasper are blameless or not.

I've been shocked by the hysterical reaction to the Archbishop of Canterbury's thoughtful comments about recognising the work done by religious courts in this country.

These appear to be community based systems for settling civic disputes. As I understand it the Orthodox Jews have had their own Beth Din courts in place for 100 years, and the Muslims already use Sharia courts to arbitrate over civil matters.

Of course, the Church of England has its own Consistory Courts, one in each diocese, and their most public function is to deal with errant clergy. What you may not know is that these same courts issue 'faculties' to churches - permission to carry out changes to the fabric of church buildings. Indeed, Anglican churches are exempt from the normal Council planning application process. A faculty, which is often much tougher to achieve than planning permission, is the legal alternative. 

I think we need to know more about the Jewish and Sharia religious courts, exactly what their legal status is, and the kinds of matters they tend to deal with. The use of them is, I understand, purely voluntary. I would like to know what safeguards are in place to prevent people being placed under cultural pressure to use them. I would like to know whether cultural and religious pressures prevent people from appealing to the mainstream legal system if they are not happy with the outcome. I'd like to know whether the rights of women under British law are upheld in spirit as well as in the letter by the courts. 

This debate is beginning to emerge through all the nonsense. But isn't that exactly what the Archbishop was asking?

On the media response, Jeremy Hargreaves gives a thoughtful analysis of the reaction to the Archbishop's comments.

No, not Ian or me this time.  Councillor Rachel O'Connor married Scott Reid this week - so we send them both every good wish for the future.

There will undoubtedly be some confusion with three Reids on the Council. Most people have worked out that two of us are married to each other, but I'm not sure what will happen now when post comes in to the Guildhall simply addressed to Cllr Reid.

But it gets even more confusing at ward level. Within the Chessington North & Hook ward Lib Dem team we have two other Reid families - and none of the families are related to each other!

Reid is a Scottish name, and is part of the Robertson clan. It means, rather unimaginatively, 'red hair', and there are several spellings around. Ian's branch of the Reid family come from the far north of Scotland, near John O'Groats, and you can find lots of Reids, spelt our way, on gravestones up there.

The life of Belinda Eyre-Brook will be celebrated on 15th February in a church service followed by a 'big, fun party' as she wished.

You can find full details on Edward Davey's website.

When Moor Lane Juniors and Buckland Infants amalgamated to form Castle Hill Primary in September, we all wanted to know what would be happening to the two sites.

It has already been agreed that Buckland is going to be the site for the new school, and from next September the plan is to house all the children there.

The Director of Children's Services, Patrick Leeson, with the Mayor, Cllr Shiraz Mirza, at the opening of Castle Hill Primary

So what will happen at the vacant Moor Lane site?

The very welcome proposal is to use it for the new Integrated Service for Disabled Children. 'Integrated' in this context means that professionals from health, education and social care will work together as a team from one building. This will bring about a vast improvements to the experience of disabled children and their parents, who currently have to make appointments with lots of different people in different parts of the borough. 

The full proposal, which goes to Executive next Tuesday, can be read here. 

The report has a long list of the professionals who will be located at Moor Lane, and includes Consultants, Specialist Paediatric Registrars, Clinical Psychologists, Speech and Language Therapists, Physiotherapists, Occupational Therapists, Social Workers, Children's Community Nurses, the Disabled Children's Information Service, Portage Workers, Participation Officer, Management and Administration Staff.

I'm so pleased that this is being achieved at last, and that it will be housed in South of the Borough.

In the past it has been very difficult for any administration at the Guildhall to develop a medium-term financial strategy.

This was because the Council would only be told in December of each year how much it would be getting from central government to supplement Council Tax from the following April.

The good news is that councils are now being given three year figures - with the overall expectations signalled well in advance - so some medium term planning is now possible.

The bad news is that Kingston's financial settlement is appalling for the next three years. The grants from government will be much less than inflation. In a nutshell, the borough has to save £13 million from a budget of just over £100 million.

Rather than just embarking on series of cuts to services, the Council (Council officers and those of us in the Lib Dem Administration) have been struggling to create a vision of the borough in the future. A lot of it is about doing things smarter, and doing things locally.

Now I'm always pushing for bringing services closer to the community, but we have to unpack generations of working practices in order to make it work. In some ways, the swingeing cuts have been a stimulus to get some of this underway.

This thinking has just been published in a booklet called Destination Kingston 2011, as an introduction to the proposed Budget itself . You can download it from this page - select option 2: Read the Council's plans for shaping services and its budget up to 2011. This includes 'case studies' about people who live in the imaginary King Street in 2011. 

If you'd like to read the full details of the proposed Budget for 2008-2009 then select options 3 and 4.

Then you can join in the discussion forum about the Budget by following option 5, or clicking here.

What happens next? This evening the Scrutiny Committee will be going through the proposals in detail.

Then tomorrow, at the South of the Borough Neighbourhood meeting, we will be looking at the impact of the proposals on our Neighbourhood Budget. You're welcome to join us at 7.30pm in Southborough School. (The meeting begins with a session with the Chief Executive of the PCT, which I flagged on Sunday).

Next, the proposals will go to Executive on Tuesday 12th February, 7.30pm at the Guildhall.

The final decisions will be made at Budget Council on Wednesday 27th February, 7.30pm at the Guildhall.

You can find the agenda and reports for all these meetings by clicking on the relevant entry on the Council calendar.

David Smith is the Chief Executive of Kingston Primary Care Trust (PCT).

He will be coming to Neighbourhood this week to discuss the major new proposals on healthcare in London. You can find these in the consultation document Healthcare for London: Consulting the Capital and on the dedicated website.

The meeting is at 7.30pm on Wednesday (6th) at Southborough School.

This is an opportunity for you to have your say about the number and type of hospitals we should have in the whole of Greater London, and the whether polyclinics are a good idea.

As I wrote last week, Brian Paddick's campaign to become Mayor of London has a real buzz about it. 

Londoners are increasingly wary of Red Ken and not at all happy at the prospect of being led by Boris, so awareness of Brian's principled approach is growing.

Are you on Facebook? If so, have a look at his page and join his list of supporters. 

If you have not yet succumbed to Facebook you can browse around his website.