On 14th December last year Salford, Worsley & Eccles Liberal Democrats called a public debate over the issue of an elected mayor for our city. Leader of Salford Liberal Democrats, Councillor Owen, invited Councillor Merry (leader of the council and member of the “NO” campaign) and referendum organisors Geoffrey Berg & Stephen Morris (English Democrats) of the “YES” campaign to debate the pros and cons.

On the issue of an elected mayor for Salford, locally the Liberal Democrats are firmly in the “NO” camp and have aligned ourselves with Salford Labour and support their campaign for a “NO” vote. However, Liberal Democrats were keen to see how Berg & Morris could fulfill their flagship promise of “lowering the city’s council tax by half, or more than half” – especially since we felt, if it could have been done, we would already have proposed such a cut.

Former Worsley Lib Dem Councillor Bob Boyd asked the first question and I was fortunate to ask the second question – sadly, neither were answered satisfactorily.

The debate was recorded by the English Democrats North West Secretary Val Morris, and it’s her comments you can hear at various points throughout the recording.

It was a rather long debate (indeed it was almost 40 minutes before I got to speak), but anyone who was not able to attend on the night and is still undecided about whether to vote “YES” or “NO” should most certainly watch it!

If you’re politically naive, then it’s generally not a good idea to accept a public debate challenge from two veterans of local politics – but that’s exactly what Geoffrey Berg (Salford’s elected mayor petition organiser) did last night.

I’ve written extensively on my blog about the elected mayor referendum that was forced by Mr Berg and his English Democrat sidekicks but as Salford approached the actual referendum date (and following some active letter writing for both the “YES” and “NO” campaign in the local paper), Councillor Norman Owen, leader of the Liberal Democrat group on Salford City Council challenged the “YES” camp to a public debate.

Councillor Owen was joined by leader of Salford City Council (and leader of the Salford Labour group), Councillor John Merry on the “NO” side whilst Geoffrey Berg and Stephen Morris of the English Democrats spoke for the “YES” camp, who were bizarrely directed in what to say (and who should say it) by Michael Moulding of the Community Action Party.

Whilst I have not been involved in local politics as long as Councillor’s Owen and Merry, in all my years I have never witnessed such a spectacle. Fortunate, to ask the second question, I quizzed Mr Berg on his bold claim that an elected mayor would “halve or more than halve Salford’s Council tax”. I was intruiged as to how he could promise such a saving, given that Salford has already been through several rounds of efficiency savings and staff redundancies.

What followed was embarrassing. Actually, it would have been very funny if this topic was not so serious (and costing the city hundreds of thousands of pounds it can ill afford).

Mr Berg failed, spectacularly, to answer my question – in fact, he waffled so incoherently I tried to press him to actually give me some indication of how he could halve Salford’s council tax. He couldn’t. This infuriated many members of the audience who had obviously come with an open mind about the idea of an elected mayor for Salford, and so the probing questions continued long after I had sat back down.

Many bizarre and insulting statements followed from Mr Berg and his English Democrat colleague. From direct personal attacks of Councillor Merry to a dismissal of the hard work local Councillors do in their local communities, the “YES” camp systematically offended virtually everyone in the room. Their “policies” were laughable, at one point claiming that Salford’s higher council tax hurt the poorest the hardest, yet failing to realise that the poorest tend to receive council tax benefit, meaning they don’t even pay it.

That was not the worst of it.

Asked by one audience member if they had even costed what they proposed, Mr Berg floundered, waffled and comprehensively failed to explain how he could possibly pay for any of what he was proposing. Fortunately, Councillor Owen and Councillor Merry were on hand to give Mr Berg a 101 in local council economics and with that the “YES” camp were finished.

One of the last questions asked what made Mr Berg qualified to speak about the pros and cons of an elected mayor for Salford and apparently the answer was that he had once (briefly) been a Conservative councillor in Bury. My recollection is that was the one question he actually answered.

Local Conservative party councillors, members and activists were conspicuous by their absence at the elected mayor debate last night – no doubt they wanted to distance themselves from Geoffrey Berg (who could blame them).

At 11am today, Liberal Democrat Councillor Owen will debate with Geoffrey Berg on Salford City Radio (94.4FM). If you live within the reception area, I urge you to listen in. You can also listen on-line at http://www.salfordcityradio.org/listen.php

A new planning application has been received by Salford City Council to erect a 4-bedroom house on the vacant land at the junction of Liverpool Street and Derby Road in Langworthy. The plot is adjacent to the Moorlands Sports and Social Club.

Application number: 11/60734/FUL

You can read the full application and view maps and illustrations of the proposed building at Salford City Council’s Planning Portal by clicking here and using the search facility for the above application number.

Navigate to the ‘documents’ link and all the details are accessible in PDF format.

Langworthy residents may wish to note that the applicant wishes to close off part of the public footpath (on Liverpool Street).

I would be interested to hear the comments of both Langworthy and Weaste residents with regards to this proposed development – comments can also be submitted to the planners via Salford City Council’s planning portal (link above).

I would expect the council’s planning panel to consider the application in the new year.

Earlier this autumn the Boundary Commission published its proposals for reducing the number of MPs in England from 650 to 600 while equalising the size of most constituencies.

While some of the new boundaries the Commission is proposing are sensible, many more needlessly tear the heart out of the communities they serve and will make effective representation in Parliament much more difficult.

We are now in a period of consultation and as a local party – supported by our colleagues in the Liberal Democrat North West regional office and National Headquarters – we have put in a series of counter-proposals.

These back the Commission where we feel it has got it right; and put forward better solutions where we feel it is necessary, using the expertise of our members from across the region.

We know our plans are better because they have been produced by people who live and breathe in the communities affected.

However, to stand a chance of persuading the Commission to adopt our counter-proposal, we need your help.

You can see here what the Boundary Commission have proposed for the North West (which affectively wipes Salford off the map and puts Langworthy into Manchester).

Below you can see our counter-proposal for the existing Salford area constituencies:

Salford Constituency   Langworthy
Salford Constituency   Weaste and Seedley
Salford Constituency   Claremont
Salford Constituency   Ordsall
Salford Constituency   Irwell Riverside
Salford Constituency   Swinton South
Salford Constituency   Pendlebury
Salford Constituency   Kersal
Salford Constituency   Broughton

Worsley and Eccles Constituency   Boothstown and Ellenbrook
Worsley and Eccles Constituency   Little Hulton
Worsley and Eccles Constituency   Walkden North
Worsley and Eccles Constituency   Walkden South
Worsley and Eccles Constituency   Winton
Worsley and Eccles Constituency   Worsley
Worsley and Eccles Constituency   Barton
Worsley and Eccles Constituency   Eccles
Worsley and Eccles Constituency   Swinton North

If you could take a minute to add your voice to the consultation via the commission’s website (here), we stand a far better chance of persuading them. There’s just two weeks before the deadline on December 5th. Please add your voice to ours in explaining why you feel they better serve your community.

The consultation is open to everyone and you can be sure the Conservatives and Labour are encouraging their members to take part too. As may be expected, those parties’ counter-proposals are not designed to make our lives any easier!

In October, Urban Vision announced that street lighting across Salford City was being updated with new LED lamps, rather than the traditional filament-type as a way of saving money and becoming more energy efficient. They even listed a few streets in Langworthy’s neighbouring ward of Claremont where the LED lamps would be installed. Great!

But what about Langworthy?

About a week ago, I asked our Langworthy Neighbourhood Manager which streets (if any) would be getting LED street lights. He did not know, so forwarded my request to Urban Vision. The response? None.

I’ve since reminded Urban Vision about my query – but their silence simply raises another question. Why does Claremont get to do it’s bit and save money for the Council whilst being more energy conscious and Langworthy does not?

Langworthy has a proud community and we want to do our bit to help the city and reduce our energy consumption, which in turn protects our planet.

UPDATE 23/11/11:
Urban Vision have finally come back to me and the following streets are scheduled to receive the LED streetlamp upgrade in November/December:

Almond Close
Amersham Street
Brentwood
Citrus Way
Clementine Close
Coconut Grove
Coomassie Street
Culverwell Drive
Mango Place
Melksham Close
Melon Place
Sandy Grove
Tenbury Close

This list is different to the streets initially listed on Labour’s Langworthy ward Councillor John Warmisham’s blog here, however he has since updated his blog to the list above (presumably because he received a copy of the email I got from Urban Vision).

I note with some annoyance that Cllr Warmisham only wrote about the LED street lighting in Langworthy after I blogged about it. Langworthy ward Coouncillors were told about LED street lighting in October, perhaps Cllr Warmisham didn’t think energy efficiency was important until I mentioned it?

There has been some debate recently regarding an elected Mayor proposal for Salford. I blogged about this here back in July.

Recent correspondence in the Salford Advertiser from the petition organisers Geoffrey Berg (a resident in Prestwich, which comes under Bury Council) and Paul Whitelegg (English Democrat party) suggests that an elected Mayor could “reduce Salford’s spending” and lower the city’s council tax. However, Paul Whitelegg agrees in his letter that the cost of the Referendum alone would be add around £1.50 to Salford’s annual council tax bill, so he is proposing I pay an extra £1.50 to fund his Referendum in my city. This flies in the face of his suggestion that an elected Mayor would be able to lower council tax bills, since the first action of any elected Mayor would have to be to raise Salford’s council tax to pay the Referendum bill!

But ignoring the cost, can the English Democrats explain why Salford would want an elected Mayor when their own Doncaster Mayor has failed miserably since he was elected in 2009?

In fact, following the government’s decision to intervene in his running of Doncaster in April of this year because of a damning Audit Commission report that city is likely to have another expensive Referendum to see if they would like to go back to more widespread representation.

In the few short years Doncaster has had an English Democrat elected Mayor, he has ignored a vote of no confidence in his leadership carried by locally elected councillors, has overseen the closure of 14 local libraries and withdrawn council funding for maintaining sports grounds which serve over a dozen former mining communities. After just two and a half years in power, his policies appear to have done nothing to improve the lives of the people of Doncaster. They will do nothing to improve the lives of Salfordians.

Regular readers of my blog and Langworthy Focus readers will remember the traffic calming campaign I spearheaded earlier this year for Seedley Park Road and Seedley Terrace. The original articles are here and here. With the help of local residents on Seedley Park Road I collected and submitted a petition to Salford Council which called for action on speeding cars using our streets as rat runs.

I’m delighted to report that our community committee has agreed to fund the traffic calming measures I campaigned for on both Seedley Park Road and Seedley Terrace, the latter gaining some new full width speed humps.

Seedley Park Road will also see some full road width speed humps as well as a driver feedback sign, which I particularly pushed for as I felt that motorists using the road either seemed unaware or simply “forgot” that we have a 20mph speed limit here.

I am incredibly grateful to Langworthy Lib Dem Councillor Lynn Drake who presented the petition during a full session of Salford Council and for supporting the campaign at our community committee.

You can see the measures that are to be introduced on both Seedley Park Road and Seedley Terrace in more detail below.

Seedley Park Road

Seedley Terrace

Today the Boundary Commission for England has released it’s proposals for changing the electoral boundaries that will be used in the next General Election (currently scheduled for sometime May 2015).

Amongst the North West shake-up, they propose to abolish the Salford & Eccles and Worsley & Eccles South Constituencies, instead creating a new ‘Swinton’ constituency and then splitting the rest of Salford across Leigh and Manchester. Kersal and Broughton will remain, as currently, in the Blackley and Broughton constituency.

The proposals are as follows:

Manchester Central Constituency: (For a map, click here)
Ancoats & Clayton
Bradford
City Centre
Hulme
Irwell Riverside
Langworthy
Ordsall
Weaste & Seedley

Swinton Constituency: (For a map, click here)
Barton
Boothstown and Ellenbrook
Claremont
Eccles
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Winton
Worsley

Leigh Constituency: (For a map, click here)
Cadishead
Irlam
Little Hulton
Walkden North
Walkden South
Astley Mosely Common
Leigh East
Leigh South
Tyldesley

Blackley and Broughton Constituency: (For a map, click here)
Cheetham
Crumpsall
Harpurhey
Higher Blackley
Miles Platting and Newton Heath
Moston
Broughton
Kersal

While I will be providing my own (alternative) suggestions to the Boundary Commission along with a combined Liberal Democrat response, I’m eager to hear what Salfordians living in Langworthy, Ordsall, Irwell Riverside and Weaste & Seedley think in particuar. Please post your comments below.

Salford City Council has opened an electronic book of condolence, to send messages to the people of Norway and the families and friends of the victims of the horrific attacks on 22 July, in Oslo and at the island of Utøya.

Councillor John Merry, Leader of Salford City Council, has added his own message as follows “I would like to express my heartfelt condolences to the families and friends of those affected by the tragedy in Norway. I have been moved by the way in which the nation has come together to support each other in these difficult times.”

All the messages received from the people of the City of Salford will be presented to the Royal Norwegian Embassy in London.

If you would like to leave your own message you can access the book of condolence via the following link
http://www.salford.gov.uk/condolences.htm

I am grateful to the Salford Star for once again being “ahead of the curve” and exclusively revealing that the University of Salford, located on the border of Langworthy and Irwell Riverside wards in Salford, is planning to remove the famous lion logo (opposite) and replace it with the word “Manchester”.

The current lion logo proudly states “The University of Salford” although some of their letterheads do also state “A Greater Manchester University” – which I do not have a problem with.

If the proposed logo does, as the Salford Star mockup below suggests, simply say University of Salford Manchester, then this is a backward step and they should quickly re-think the idea.

The University of Salford has proudly stated it’s home in it’s logo since it became a fully-fledged University in 1967 (in fact, Salford University can trace it’s origins back to 1896, when it was the Royal Technical Institute, Salford).

So why does The University of Salford think now is a good time to suggest they are in Manchester when their new MediaCity:UK building at Salford Quays is on the brink of opening? Perhaps it may have something to do with the fact that a recent survey of students in a poll for accomodationforstudents.com showed Salford University to be the worst university in the country in which to study. Manchester University was voted the joint second best place to study.

The University of Salford management board should think again, reverse this terrible decision before it is too late, and stick with the traditional logo.

Lastly, I call on Salford Council and all 60 of the city’s ward councillors (including all 6 from both Langworthy and Irwell Riverside wards) to denounce the decision to change the logo to “University of Salford Mancheter” and call on them to support me in arguing for return to the traditional logo we know and love.

Salford City Council has been praised by the Deputy Prime Minister for taking an innovative and forward thinking approach to supporting complex families.

In his speech to the Local Government Association, Nick Clegg gave the example of a particularly complex family of five that Salford City Council has worked with to get their lives back on track, saving tens of thousands of pounds in the process.

Speaking about complex families at the conference, Nick Clegg said: “Their complex problems mean they can end up seeing dozens of professionals across public services – but those professionals aren’t always joined up, making it near impossible for anyone to get an overall picture of what that family needs.

“Community budgets are budgeting for real life, breaking down the barriers between different parts of the machine, and treating people with troubles like human beings, not figures on a spreadsheet.”

Before Salford’s Better Life Chances team worked with this family, they were costing the taxpayer more than £200,000 per year on top of the normal costs for public services, with more than 250 interventions form a wide range of agencies, including the council, police, housing and NHS in a one year period.

Their chaotic lifestyle meant they used more than 109 hours of police officers time across 58 call outs resulting in five arrests and the children being placed on supervision orders. There were also five occasions of them ending up in hospital due to overdoses, self harm, stabbing and assault, as well as two housing injunctions taken out against the family.

By taking a more proactive approach to working with the family, Salford City Council and their partners have helped them to get their lives back on track, while also significantly reducing the impact they have on public resources. The outcome for this particular family was a saving of more than two thirds of the £200,000 cost of reacting to the problems in this family’s lives.

The work involves a wide range of agencies sitting around a table to look at a family’s problems in their entirety, rather than each agency dealing with individual family members. By sharing what they know and finding solutions for the family, the Better Life Chances team reduces the strain on the public purse.

In the case of a family in Salford, the team worked with them to deal with their debt problems and look at ways to get them back into work. This reduced the mother’s anxiety, meaning she was less dependent on the health service, as well as lowering alcohol consumption which reduced the chances of the family becoming involved in antisocial behaviour. This ultimately has a positive impact on the younger members of the family as they have more stability at home and are therefore more likely to re-engage with the education system, increasing the likelihood of their success further down the line.

Councillor John Merry, Leader of Salford City Council, said: ““For some time now we have been developing this new approach to dealing with families that seem to have been failed by the state and yet cost the most to support. My main aim is to help everybody in Salford to achieve their full potential. For some families this takes more time and work so we have to find ways of working right across public services that suit the family whilst also reducing the money we are spending on them. Allowing single agencies to lead rather than all trying to do our thing is definitely the way forward here “

Source: Salford City Council

I was reading today on Richard Baum’s blog (Bury Lib Dem campaigner) how following the change in political leadership on Bury Council (from Tory to Labour, decided by the draw of a short straw) that the new leader of Bury Council has started a “leader’s blog“.

This is very similar to Sir Richard Leese’s leader’s blog over on the Manchester City Council website.

Bury campaigner Richard Baum makes a good point when he states that while it could do with opening up comments, it’s a step in the right direction and should be applauded.

So, I ask, when will Salford’s Council leader start his blog? He’s already on Twitter, commenting on local politics as @JohnDMerry and is well known for frequenting the comment threads on this blog, Joe O’Neil’s “cut and paste” website, Steve Cooke’s blog and Iain Lindley’s site so he’s clearly not a “technophobe” by any means.

I think a leader’s blog would be a great way to engage Salfordians and would be saying this no matter who the leader of Salford Council was (or whichever party they represented). Come on John, engage your public, what do you say?

Don’t forget tomorrow (Tuesday 24th May) there will be a residents meeting at the Moorlands Sports & Social Club (the former Weaste & District Conservative Club) on Liverpool Street at 4pm.

Representatives from Urban Vision and Palmer Demolition will be in attendance to give a brief overview of their plans for the site and to answer resident’s questions.

Langworthy ward Councillor Lynn Drake will be chairing the meeting and I will be on hand to collect questions, should residents not want to ask them personally.

The other ward Councillors have also been invited.

This is not a political meeting, it is purely for concerned residents to find out what is happening with the former school site during demolition and to learn about future plans for the site once cleared.

The Manchester Evening News is today carrying a story that Salford Council has been vindicated in it’s sale of land to Tesco, despite Salford Shopping City owners Salford Estates attempts to halt the sale by launching a judicial review.

Salford Estates complained that the Council did not get the full value of the land from Tesco but judges disagreed and said the information the council received over the cost of the deal from independent experts was ‘proper’ and was taken on board by planning bosses. The court heard there was ‘no proof’ that the land was worth more than Tesco paid.

Additionally, the judge said considerations on behalf of the council were ‘properly taken’ and bosses decided ‘rationally’ to take up the Tesco deal.

Ruling out reversing the planning permission, the judge  added: “The council did not act irrationally or on an error of law.”

I blogged about this pending case back in January when I was unconvinced by assurances from the Councl that everything was above board. I was wrong when I said “a dodgy land deal was done” – is it has now been proved there was nothing wrong with the land deal between Tesco and Salford Council.

While I still find it odd how Salford Council handled a £4m “pre-payment” from Tesco (which paid for the new Willow Tree Primary School) the judicial review has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this was neither a ‘bribe’ nor involved corruption on any part by any council officer or councillor. I was wrong to suggest this in my January blog post.

I call on Salford Council’s Monitoring Officer to quickly respond to my January complaint  and a issue a formal response to the above affect, as it would be my preference not to 100% rely on the Manchester Evening News for the full facts in this case.

As of last week the ‘free’ bulky waste collection in Langworthy came to an end. Since the start of Langworthy’s SRB5 re-generation the council has collected bulky waste free of charge and this has helped to combat (but not eliminate) the fly-tipping that has plagued our ward in recent years.

All this has now come to an end in a short-sighted cut by Salford’s Labour Council.

The new charges are £24.14 for up to four items (excluding builder’s rubble, bricks, concrete, paving flags and other heavy items and gas bottles).

However, all is not lost. Salford Community Transport ‘New to You’ have been providing local residents with a free collection service for  re-usable bulky waste items such as beds, suites, drawers, washing machines and tumble dryers for some time now. This will continue.

Salford Community Transport ‘New to You’ is a charity which collects good quality unwanted furniture for the re-supply to families and individuals in need and will collect any reusable household items free of charge, such as Beds, Three piece suites, Washing machines, Tumble dryers, Wardrobes, Chest of drawers, Dressing and dining tables.

Bulky waste items need to be in good condition and not flat packed, damaged or in need of dismantling for transport.

To arrange a collection of re-usable bulky waste items or for more information please call Salford Community Transport ‘New to You’ on 0161 736 8852 or email: salford@communitytransport.org.

Alternatively, you can also donate your unwanted furniture at the Lumns Lane Household Waste Recycling Centre.

Back in March I wrote about the now closed Seedley Primary School and how residents who live adjacent and nearby were worried about what was going to happen to the site.

Langworthy Lib Dem Councillor Drake who lives next door to the school building (and whose gated alley joins the school building wall) was concerned that given Salford Council’s lack of maintenance of other buildings locally there was a danger the school could become unsafe so she attempted to get assurances from the Council over the school’s future.

No information was forthcoming until a demolition notice was posted on the lampost outside on Liverpool Street indicating the school was to be demolished in May 2011.

As residents have not been consulted or their concerns allayed about the affects the demolition will have on adjacent homes, as well as the future plans for the site (both short term and long term) we are calling a public meeting for all residents concerned to talk with officers about the situation.

The residents meeting will be on May 24th at 4pm, either at The Moorside Sports and Social Club (formerly the Weaste & District Conservative Club) at the junction of Liverpool Street and Seedley Park Road or at the All Souls Church on Liverpool Street at the junction of Derby Road. Watch this space!

While 4pm is hardly an ideal time, it was the only timeslot we could get Urban Vision and representatives from the demolition company to agree to. It’s hope a further residents meeting can be held at a later date in the evening to update residents who cannot attend this one.

I’ve had a short break after the local elections and while I didn’t get the result I wanted in Langworthy (or indeed across Salford as a whole) I’m proud to have stood for what I believed in (and still do!). For those that have not seen it, the result was:

• Elected: LOVEDAY, Gina (Labour)
• Electorate: 9,256
• Votes cast: 2,415
• Turnout: 26.1%
• Majority: 1,032
• Void votes: 23
• Status: Labour hold

Tomorrow is polling station and the polls are open from 7am-10pm. Here is a list of polling districts and polling stations in the Langworthy ward and remember, you do not need your polling card to vote (although it makes it a bit easier for the poll clerks to find and identify you on the voting register).

QA Langworthy Cornerstone, 451 Liverpool Street, M6 5QQ

QB Fit City Clarendon, Liverpool Street, M5 4AY

QC Fit City Clarendon, Liverpool Street, M5 4AY

QD Temporary Building, Visitors Car Park, Willow Tree Primary School, Greenland Street, M6 5TJ

QE Temporary Building, Lower Seedley Road, M6 5WL

QF Pendleton Gateway, 1 Broadwalk, M6 5FX

QG St. Paul’s Primary School, Cross Lane, M5 4AL

QH Pendleton Gateway, 1 Broadwalk, M6 5FX

QI William Sutton Trust Community Centre, Doveridge Gardens / Seedley Road, M6 5NQ

QJ Community Room, 15 Springbank, Brentwood, M6 8RH

QK Halton House, 36 Eccles Old Road, M6 8RA

If you’re unsure what polling district you live in and do not have your polling card to hand, please feel free to telephone the Lib Dem Office on 0161-736 5500 and we will look it up for you.

Remember to vote STEVE MIDDLETON for Langworthy, an all-year-round hard worker who lives locally.

Local community website SalfordOnline have asked all candidates standing in this year’s Salford local elections three questions. As it’s taking them a while to post the answers, I thought it’d be worthwile me posting my own answers on my blog:-

1) Why have you decided to stand?
As a resident of Langworthy I really care about my neighbourhood and feel that we are under-represented in the community and on the council. I want to make a difference to the quality of our lives in Langworthy, by ensuring that Salford Council are more pro-active in helping to reduce crime and finishing the regeneration of our ward. I would vote to ensure that taxpayer’s money is not wasted on marketing spin, glossy magazines and consultants and instead spent in our community to provide services to local residents. Somebody needs to stand up for Langworthy and it’s clear to me that if our elected representatives do not live in our area, they cannot understand the problems we face and what we want – I see the problems for myself every day and my neighbours tell me what issues they face every day.

2) What do you see as the main problems affecting your area?
Salford Labour have failed to complete the promised re-generation of Langworthy and, like many other parts of the city, we are left with tinned-up houses and fenced off grassed areas where good, solid family homes used to be. While the Lib Dems in government have backed the PFI project for Pendleton, which will give the area a much needed facelift, it comes years later that it should have. Labour have forgotten Langworthy and allowed many of the council-owned and maintained buildings in the area rot to the point of collapse, two examples of which are the Langworthy Hotel and the shops on Liverpool Street. Drug farms are becoming an increasing problem across the ward, along with anti-social behaviour which is usually alcohol-related. Finally, our roads have deteriorated to such a state that last year Labour’s leader admitted the council had a £100m backlog of road repairs with no possible way to reduce that backlog.

3) How would you go about solving those problems?
The Liberal Democrats in government have approved the Pendleton PFI project which is a welcome start to begin the regeneration of the area, but there are still many homes and streets across the whole ward where improvement is needed. Salford Lib Dems will be pushing for improvements to homes across the area so that they reach the decent homes standard and insisting that council-owned property is properly maintained and looked after. Many of the drug farms that have been closed down by local Police teams have been inside socially rented council houses and the Lib Dems on the Salford Council are committed to evicting tenants who allow their homes to be used to cultivate drugs, something Labour seem hesitent to do. Anti-social behaviour should not be tolerated and many occurences have been fuelled by alcohol – as Langworthy has far more licenced premises than any other ward across the city, we would put a temporary hold on granting of any further licences to sell alcohol and immediately order a review of those premises currently selling alcohol in the area. Alcohol retailers have a duty to their neighbours and we would encourage them to work with the council to ensure that alcohol is sold responsibly and legally. Finally, I am happy to report that Lib Dems in government have recently granted Salford over £608,000 to immediately tackle road repairs across the city which comes on the back of £100m which was earmarked for potholes in February. Lib Dems in government have recognised that potholes and poorly maintained roads are a danger to all road users and brings the total extra funding to £200m since the election.