The Sutton Lib Dems are now neither “Liberal” nor “Democratic”
“Liberal”, adjective: Willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one’s own; open to new ideas
“Democrat”, noun: An advocate or supporter of democracy, a system of government by the whole population typically through elected representatives working in line with citizens wishes.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely and the Lib Dems have retained their stranglehold on Sutton for too long. With the emergence of Conegate, Plebgate, Petitiongate, SDEN, SEND, CPZs and the never-ending list of self-serving politics, it’s well and truly time for change.
Confused about these issues? Let us break it down for you.
Conegate
Put simply, this was part of the Lib Dems Streetspace project which resulted in width restrictions being placed in the critical path of a dual carriageway under the bridge on the A2043. Whilst the premise could have been good, there was no consultation, and many are claiming it’s just another “cash grab” from the Lib Dems.
So why did this happen?
Well, there was government money on offer to implement these schemes. The Lib Dems wanted this money, so they implemented schemes without speaking to anyone, something residents are calling un-democratic with the irony not lost on them.
Ben Andrew, Lib Dem councillor for Wandle Valley, says “We won the money through a bidding process for schemes in the borough”.
So how much did they get? £57,000 for the 2 hour delays they caused under the railway bridge in Worcester Park. Add to that a further £368,000 for ten further schemes since the amazing “success” of the first project. They’re also hoping for a further £100,000 in DfT funding to keep up the pace. That’s over half a million quid to date.
It took 3,500 signatures to get this undone eventually.
Streetspace
Much like Conegate, except this is the continuation of Conegate’s “successes”.
Up next - there are 5 areas where one or more junctions are becoming walk/cycle only by the end of September:
- Sutton North ward (All Saints/ Grennell/ Benhill & Oakhill Junction/ Oakhill & Elgin Junction).
- Worcester Park ward (Browning Avenue closure, between Dorcester Rd Junction and Roundabout, and Lincoln Road becoming one way from Longfellow to Green Lane).
- Wallington North/Carshalton Central/The Wrythe ward (Butter Hill Bridge/Mill Lane junction).
- Sutton South/Carshalton Central ward (Kings Lane Bridge).
- Nonsuch (Esher Ave/Wrayfield Road junction)
Once again, no consultation, no democracy. There are now numerous petitions by residents against each of these suggestions. The core petition has over 3000 residents opposed to the measures in their current form.
Whilst many people are saying that the measures could have been positive if done correctly - and this is key -, this isn’t democracy, and it’s not what people voted for. Yes, sure, we need to move towards cycling, reducing our reliance on cars - but forcing it on residents without their consent will cause problems and set back advances. Serious measures need serious consideration and with reports of delayed ambulances we’re asking what provisions were put in place to stop this?
We also have numerous problems in Sutton in regard to public transport, one the Council has been lacklustre in fixing to date.
Crucially though, it’s the squandering of taxpayers money that is most shocking. £34,000 of taxpayer money was reportedly spent on just 9 cones. Further, the Highways Agency has stated that the Liberal Democrats “over bid” for these schemes. The police have also stated that they weren’t notified in advance.
This is a classic example of good schemes ruined by poor management. We’re asking - why not pilot these schemes in the most at-risk areas, and use the resulting data to present a solid argument for future schemes with clearly understood benefits?
Plebgate
So, none of the above plans have gone down well. Unfortunately, one of the bodies that Sutton Lib Dems have been working with decided to refer to anyone that objected as a “pleb”. This was posted on a public forum and soon spread on social media. The wheels of the Lib Dem propaganda machine are starting to fall off as people realise that they don’t want to elect representatives whose working partners criticize and namecall residents for expressing their legitimate concerns. That’s not very ‘Liberal’, is it?
Petitiongate
Residents have been frustrated, and rightly so, by all these actions by the Council. But good news! The Council has a petition system that they require you to use to voice your concerns. The only problem is that Section 4E of the constitution, specifically 34.2 contains a link that doesn’t work. Another link provided also doesn’t work. Then there’s no easily found section for petitions on the Council’s website. People who did manage to get the petitions working after casting some black magic found that there was a series of “errors” which plagued people signing them in the early days. The Lib Dems were told about this, but the issues remained for quite some time. Fortunately, petitions seems to be up and running again.
SDEN
This is a long story which you may already have heard about, but in short, the Lib Dems set up a “district heating” company to supply “green energy at no extra cost” with parity to the market to hundreds of residents in Hackbridge. However, it’s not at no extra cost, as, they’re charging residents millions over the market rate for their energy. When residents complained, Councillors lied about how many complaints they’d received, then told residents to just turn their heating down, and eventually refused to speak to the Residents Association and then demanded that people could only complain from specific email addresses already held on file. No phone calls, no letters, no understanding for disabled users. Awfully similar to Petitiongate - if you don’t complain using the exact method they want you to use, you’d better not complain at all! If you try, they’ll change the rules or delete complaints retrospectively. Once again, not very Liberal and not very Democratic.
CPZ’s
Controlled Parking Zones have their fans of course, but the public outcry has been immense. There is no doubt they’re needed in some places, but with reports of profiteering from them, the obvious connection to increased council income, and previous problems with objections not being listened to, it’s yet another issue stacked on top of the previous issues facing a failing Lib Dem Council. Why implement all these schemes, especially in areas where residents have kept stating that they didn’t need them?
SEND
It was all over the BBC’s Panorama, it’s been raised in the Houses of Parliament, but Sutton Council and the Lib Dems are sticking to their guns: they’re doing a good job. In fact, the Lib Dem Council outsources its SEND provision to a separate company, Cognus, who reject three times the national average level of applications despite having some of the highest funding . Proof of Cognus’s poor performance is evidenced by the statistics - a shocking 87% of parents who take their case to tribunal go on to win.. At the end of the day, these are families and parents who are already struggling, why put them through this unnecessary stress?
So what now?
This is a list of failures no one wants to have on their CV, which is why some Liberal Democrats are already distancing themselves from many of these schemes. Will any Councillors be jumping ship? We’ll have to wait and see, but all we know is that it’s going to be an interesting time in Sutton for the next few years.