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!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbPq3fq_OSA

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.

From today, Tuesday 12 April 2011, your blue and brown bin, recycling collections will be changing from a fortnightly to monthly collection schedule.

Under the new scheme:

• Your blue and brown recycling bins will be collected once a month (instead of once a fortnight) on the same day as your black bin.
• Collection of all other bins will not change with your general domestic waste (black bin) collected weekly and your garden waste (pink lidded bin) collected fortnightly.

All households in Salford should have received a new calendar sticker attached to your blue and brown recycling bins which detail your new monthly collection dates. Please make a note of the calendar dates showing your new sequence of recycling collections.

Because I live in Langworthy, I’m frequently checking planning applications to see if any potential development could cause problems for my neighbours and this evening I have come across a troubling application from Tesco, in relation to the Pendleton Store.

Late last year, Tesco were controversially granted planning permission for their new “eco-store” in Pendleton (despite nothing about the building being eco-anything) and to protect local Langworthy residents from noise and being disturbed in the early hours, a restriction was put in place on the times that Tesco would be allowed to deliver their produce to the store.

These restrictions were no HGV movements/loading/unloading outside the hours of 9am and 9pm and no other loading or unloading outside the hours of 9am and 9pm.

Tesco is now seeking to remove these planning restrictions by way of planning application number 11/60166/FUL which is a variation of their original application number 10/59130/FUL which has already been granted permission.

All local Pendleton and Langworthy residents should immediately write to Salford Council’s planning committee quoting planning application number 11/60166/FUL. Langworthy and Pendleton residents have an automatic right to quiet enjoyment of their homes without being woken by deliveries on a Sunday morning before 9am.

Tesco’s reason for removing the above loading/unloading restrictions are “to enable the foodstore to operate more efficiently with regard to deliveries to the store” which is a nonsense reason. Tesco takes no account of it’s neighbours and the store is fully capable of operating just fine with loading and unloading between the hours of 9am and 9pm.

You can comment on this planning application by going to http://publicaccess.salford.gov.uk/publicaccess/ and searching for planning application number 11/60166/FUL and then clicking on ‘Make a Public Comment’

I took this photograph in June 2009 a few months after construction began of the new Willow Tree Primary School on Greenland Street in Langworthy. As you can see from the state of the road, contractors heavy goods vehicles that delivered and removed building materials completed wrecked the road.

We were promised this would be “looked into” by Urban Vision and the state of the road has regularly been reported to Community Committee with a view to insisting the building contractor return the road to the condition it was before they started their work.

Today the condition of the road on Greenland Street is no different (ok, it’s slightly worse). While the school has now opened and the HGVs have gone, the potholes and uneven surface of the road remains.

My neighbours and I are sick to death of having to drive down roads like this – and I cannot imagine what is must be like to cycle down it!

What really annoys is that they “forgot” to paint the yellow “no parking” lines outside the school entrance and had to come back and do it after the school has opened. The even painted the lines through the potholes!

Unfortunately, as a mere resident (and community committee member) I have reached the end of what I can do to remedy this problem. If I was a Councillor, I could speak directly to Salford Council’s Highways Department and Urban Vision themselves, perhaps even with the school building contractor, to reach a resolution to this 2 year problem.

Our Labour Councillors in Langworthy have failed us. If you elect me as your Councillor in Langworthy on May 5th I promise to do everything I can to have Greenland Street resurfaced out of the extra “pothole cash” provided by our coalition government.

These are difficult times for people across Britain, but this week has shown that this can also be an opportunity to reshape Britain into a fairer, more equal and greener country.

Labour’s financial legacy has left Britain needing to borrow an extra £400million, every single day, just to get by. Labour also left us paying £120million in interest on our debt each and every day – for that we could build a new primary school every hour.

Salford’s share of the country’s debt now stands at a monstrous £7.98billion and in order to sort that out the government is making the savings which I know a lot of people are finding painful. As a public sector worker myself, having a pay freeze as prices go up, I know exactly how a lot of people feel about this. But the alternative would be worse.

I am pleased that despite all this, Liberal Democrat policies coming into action this week are making a positive difference to people’s lives in our great city.

Over the last seven days in Salford, thanks to Liberal Democrats:

• 74,000 local people are getting a £200 income tax cut – benefiting 23 million people across the country
• 3,400 local people have been lifted out of paying income tax altogether, with more to come
• 39,500 Salford pensioners have been given an extra £4.50 a week – and those retiring from today will be on average £15,000 better off over their retirement.
• Nationally, £625million extra has gone to our schools, aimed at the most disadvantaged pupils – rising to £2.5billion a year by 2015

Liberal Democrats in government will not stop there.

This week also saw Pensions Minister Steve Webb announcing that the Government will be introducing a simple, flat-rate state pension of £140 to replace the current complicated, unfair and means-tested system.

Business Secretary Vince Cable is cutting regulation to promote small business and create jobs.

Energy and Climate Change Secretary, Chris Huhne revealed that Britain will be hosting the 2012 Clean Energy Summit – putting Britain at the heart of the Green Energy Revolution.

These are some of the reasons I am proud to be a Lib Dem candidate in the coming local elections. In these tough times (and, let’s face it, they’d be tough whoever was running it) we’re making the most of our position as a junior partner of the coalition and putting into action nationally things that are really helping Salford people.

It’s now under a month until the Salford local elections on May 5th and I am proud, to once again, be selected as the Liberal Democrat candidate for Langworthy.

My main reason for standing again is simply because I enjoy helping people and solving problems. Being a Councillor allows me to do that in an official capacity and offers me an opportunity to put resident’s concerns and problems direct to council officers.

While party politics is important, I see myself more as a local champion than simply “the Liberal Democrat candidate” – the Lib Dem way of getting a pothole fixed, a broken street light repaired, an illegal off-road motorbike reported or graffiti cleaned up is no different to the Labour way. There are only the differences between good Councillors and bad ones – Councillors who respond to calls for help and stay in touch, and ones who don’t. I hope people vote with that in mind, and that they think I am worth their vote.

Living in Langworthy (unlike all my opponents in this election, apart from the UKIP candidate) means that my wife and I are a part of this community and we want it to thrive.

I hope that people feel I am worthy of their vote. I would be happy to speak to anyone about any issue, large or small, at any time. Just drop me a line on 07870 444 235 or email me at steve@stevemiddleton.info

People can also read this blog which I have updated often over the past couple of years to give people the chance to hear my views and engage in debate. A few Salford Lib Dems from my party have sites like this in Salford and I am proud of this as a tool to keep people informed and engaged. You’ll also notice that many of my opponents in Labour and  the Conservatives have commented on my blog posts – I actively encourage them to do so, as I am not afraid to debate my points, I welcome the opportunity to do so.

Over the next few weeks I’ll talk about the issues and why I think I am worth your vote more than my opponents. I hope I can convince enough people. If you’re unconvinced, let me know why and I’ll see what I can do.

Whilst reviewing a response to Monton residents and business owners from Salford Council’s Lead Member for Planning Labour Councillor Derek Antrobus on the excellent Salford Online, I notice a startling sentence in his official statement:

“It is important to bear in mind that…users at Monton have had nearly a decade of free parking when charges should have been imposed”

It’s an astonishing fact that almost 10 years ago, Salford Council’s Planning and Transportation Regulatory Panel passed a resolution to introduce car parking charges in Monton, but then forgot to do so.

And while I have every sympathy for Monton residents and business owners, since I disagree with having to park to shop locally (Bury Council can manage free parking, why can’t Salford?) – it seems that this is yet more proof of Salford Labour’s financial mis-management of our beloved city.

If Salford Council had implemented the Monton car parking charges back in 2002 when they were supposed to, that might have stopped this month’s increases in all the other council-controlled car parks across Salford.

You can see Councillor Antrobus’ full statement, including his admission that they simply forgot to implement car parking charges in Monton on Salford Online here.

Vote  out incompetent Labour on May 5th.

Vote Liberal Democrat in Langworthy.

The candidates for Langworthy ward in the 2011 Salford City Council local elections were published yesterday, revealing six candidates have been validly nominated in Langworthy. They are as follows:-

• Andy Behan, Trade Unionists and Socialists Against Cuts
• George Darlington, Conservative Party
• Keith Fairhurst, British National Party
• Graeme Hulse, UK Independence Party
• Gina Loveday, Labour Party
• Steve Middleton, Liberal Democrats

A few interesting names in that list. Yours truly is at the bottom of the ballot paper and current incumbant Gina Loveday (who lives in Blackfriars, Irwell Riverside ward) is 5th on the ballot.

Andy Behan stood for TUSK/TUSC/Hazel Must Go last year in Ordsall and garnered 255 votes. It’s hard to believe he’ll even match that in Langworthy, since most of his Ordsall voters were undoubtedly making a “anti-Hazel Blears” vote.

George Darlington was the Tory paper candidate here in Langworthy last time and managed a distant third place, just managing to beat the BNP by 67 votes.

Keith Fairhurst recently stood as the BNP candidate in Walkden North on 3rd March this year finishing 4th with 92 votes. He didn’t stand anywhere last year but in 2011 has suddenly popped up on the electoral register, living in Irwell Riverside ward.

UKIP didn’t stand a candidate in Langworthy last year, this year newcomer Graeme Hulse is nominated by them and, thankfully, at least lives in the ward like me (unlike the Labour, Conservative, BNP and TUSC candidates).

I suspect UKIP and BNP will split their small representation between them this year and it’s clear from previous years that the Conservatives just can’t win here.

It’s a straight fight between local Langworthy Lib Dem Steve Middleton and Labour’s candidate from Blackfriars. Who would you choose to represent your neighbourhood? A fellow neighbour….it makes perfect sense.

Kick Labour out by voting Liberal Democrat in Langworthy on May 5th – it’s the only way to get rid of Labour here.

Local Liberal Democrats have welcomed a commitment made in last week’s Budget to give another £100m to repair potholes in the nation’s roads. The extra funding, which will see £608,644 to repair pot holes across Salford, comes on top of the £100m earmarked for pot holes which was announced by the coalition government in February.

Commenting on the news, Liberal Democrat Candidate for Langworthy ward Steve Middleton said “This is great news, and brings the total extra funding prioritised by the government to £200m. Hopefully this will start to undo the estimated £100m maintenance backlog for Salford roads which accumulated under our Labour-controlled council.”

Steve continued “Road and pavement repairs are one of the biggest issues local people have asked me about while I’ve been campaigning this year. We are crying out for investment, and locally Lib Dem Councillors and Campaigners have been pressing for repairs year after year. Now the Lib Dems in government are coming up with the goods even in these bad financial times. Potholes are bad for cars, bikes and buses, and wonky pavements are bad for pedestrians. This money from the government will help sort it, and we’ll campaign hard to get the worst local roads fixed.”

Greater Manchester Police has issued a warning to smartphone and iPhone users to keep their expensive gadgets and mobile phones safe after a theft earlier this month at the Langworthy metrolink stop.

A thief snatched an iPhone at about 2.30pm on Friday 4 March 2011 from a 27-year-old woman who was travelling towards Eccles on the Metrolink.

She was flicking through applications on the phone when the tram stopped at the Langworthy Road stop on Eccles New Road and a stranger snatched the phone from her and ran out of the tram.

The victim and another passenger chased the offender.

There is no clear description of the offender and it is not known whether the person responsible is a man or a woman. The person was wearing a grey hooded top.

Police Constable Mark Gingell said: "The offender may have thought he or she could get away with this but we are now actively pursuing this person.

"We are appealing to anyone who was on this tram and who might be able to paint a better picture of the offender. The descriptions we have are scant because the incident took place so quickly.

"The more witnesses we get the better the chance we have of tracing the person responsible."

Anyone with any information is asked to call police on 0161 856 5250 or call the independent charity Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

Following Salford Council’s budget and their announcement that school crossing patrol numbers are at risk I note that Liberal Democrat-controlled Sefton Council (just down the East Lancs Road) has voted in it’s own budget to reduce Councillor allowances by 5%.

This measure (suggested by both opposition parties on Salford Council and rejected by Labour) has saved all of Sefton’s “lollipop services”.

Sefton Councillors now receive £8,520 which also includes a fixed amount for travelling expenses. Compare that to Salford Council’s £10,080 standard allowance plus travel expenses can be claimed on top of that.

All councils throughout the country are getting less taxpayers government grant money to pay for running their services because Britain is hugely in debt and they are having to make big savings. The previous government spent money that it simply didn’t have.  Instead, it borrowed.

Our “national credit card” debt is now equal to £22,400 for every person living in our country. We are in hock to others who lend us this money and we cannot go on like this and must reduce this huge national overdraft for us and future generations.  Government has to pay out millions of pounds every day in interest payments.

It’s difficult to realise, as we all go about our daily business, that Britain’s finances are in such a dreadful, perilous state. In fact, worse than any other developed country. That’s how bad things are and they are no different at a local level.

Huge cuts to frontline services have already been made by Labour-controlled Salford Council, with more than 600 job losses – but savings could have been made elsewhere without impacting essential services.

The Liberal Democrat group on Salford Council wanted to help make sensible savings in the budget, but Labour refused to allow local Lib Dems to engage with them, affectively shutting us out from the process. The Conservative Group faced the same shut-out from Labour and they offered a budget of their own they knew would be voted down by the Labour-controlled Council (it was).

If Labour had listened to some of the budget suggestions made by the Liberal Democrats and Tories, we could have had a budget agreed by all local parties that would not have seen frontline services slashed, but expensive and unnecessary projects such as sponsoring the BBC Philharmonic Orchestra, commissioning a “world-class” opera and moving two lumps of metal (aka the Quays cranes) a couple of miles up the road.

Labour have their priorities wrong, it’s time to make a change on the council and send Labour a message on May 5th by voting Liberal Democrat and shifting the balance of power away from those that do not deserve it. Cuts to our frontline services in Salford are Labour cuts, don’t let them convince you otherwise.

Liberal Democrat Councillors in Salford were today welcoming the news that due to changes in the national tax system, implemented by Liberal Democrats in the Coalition Government, 3,290 of Salford’s poorest residents have been lifted out of the personal income tax band altogether.

A further 91,000 residents will also find themselves better off when the changes are implemented in April this year – paying up to £200 less per year in income tax.

When the coalition was formed the two parties agreed to implement a key Liberal Democrat policy that the personal allowance for income tax should be increased in order to help lower and middle-income earners.

The change is being funded with the money that would have been used to pay for the increase in Employee National Insurance thresholds proposed by the Conservatives, as well as revenues from increases in Capital Gains Tax rates for non-business assets.

After pressure from the Liberal Democrats the two parties also agreed to a longer-term policy objective of further increasing the personal allowance to £10,000, making further real terms steps each year towards this objective. Achieving this would provide much more tax fairness towards the poorest in our society, something Liberal Democrats are committed to.

Speaking about the great news Councillor Norman Owen, Leader of the Liberal Democrat group on Salford Council said,

“This is great news for thousands of Salford’s residents, especially for the 3,290 residents who are being lifted out of the threshold for paying income tax. This will be a really positive bit of news for those people, who are amongst the poorest in our communities, at a time when many are struggling. Liberal Democrats are continuing to push for yearly increases to the allowance until we reach £10,000 as the threshold. This would provide much more tax fairness towards the poorest in our society.”

Residents of Pendleton are celebrating now that the Liberal Democrat-Conservative coalition government has approved a PFI scheme for the area which will see it transformed. Over £100m of investment from the government will build over 1,200 new homes as part of the scheme and see a massive refurbishment of 1,200 council homes.

Pendleton is already the home to 13,000 proud and passionate residents and they will benefit from this government-backed large scale regeneration which will return the area back to the once thriving community it used to be. Under PFI the properties will remain in council ownership and tenants will remain as council tenants with all their existing
rights, including right-to-buy.

I welcome the government announcement. Pendleton has been in need of modernisation for far too long and for many years Labour dragged their feet over investment here. The regeneration of Pendleton will create a better choice of
quality houising for new and existing residents. In addition to providing new homes and bringing existing ones up to
the Decent Homes Standard, we will now see a much needed re-modelling of streets and estates.

There has been no real investment in Pendleton in the 34 years since it was built and that’s a sad reflection on Labour’s
dismissive attitude towards the community-spirited people who live here. I’m glad that the government has approved the PFI scheme and I think this is an opportunity to make Pendleton a better place.

Liberal Democrat Councillor for Langworthy Lynn Drake said “People have been frustrated by the lack of investment in Pendleton so I am extremely pleased that the coalition has given the green light to Pendleton PFI. I’m particularly gratified to see that social and private housing will be developed in a way that means there is no obvious visual distinction between them.”

Lynn added “Pendleton has a great community but the estate does need redesigning to help reduce crime. I think most residents will welcome the proposals.”

Local Liberal Democrat Councillor Lynn Drake has been asking Salford Council officers if they can shed any light on the future of Seedley Primary School. So far the school, which closed last summer, has not been earmarked for any future
use and local residents are worried that the building will be allowed by the council, to fall into unsafe disrepair, just
like the adjacent council owned shops on Liverpool Street.

Councillor Drake who lives behind the school said “The shops on Liverpool Street partially collapsed in June last year and I’m worried this will happen to the school building if it is not maintained properly.”

Recently, Salford Council published a notice of intention to demolish the old school building, but there’s no indication of when that might happen, how the site will be secured both,during and after demolition and what (if any) plans the Council have beyond that. It’s possible the Council will try and sell the site to a developer, if so, both Councillor Drake and I will be keeping an eye out for any future planning applications.

Langworthy residents were left angry and upset after January’s Community Committee meeting where it was revealed by council officers that it was unlikely there would be enough money left in the budget to pay for much needed car parking and an access road behind the shops on Langworthy Road.

I attended this meeting and raised my concerns about the council’s priorities.

By the time the Langworthy Road shop car parking scheme reached the community committee, it was too late as council officers wanted the money left over in the budget to be spent in Ordsall on some new ‘super crossings’ at the soon-to-bebuilt Oasis Academy.

If the Council can afford to spend nearly £700,000 moving the two blue cranes from the Quays to Regent Road roundabout, I’m sure they can afford to fund the supercrossings themselves and let us spend community funding on the essential car parking and an access road behind the struggling shops on Langworthy Road.

Local Lib Dem ward Councillor Lynn Drake was astonished at the decision.

She said “Shop owners and residents on Langworthy Road were promised the parking 5 years ago as part of the re-generation. It never happened then and looks like it won’t happen now.”

Last summer Langworthy Lib Dem campaigner Steve Middleton and local
Councillor Lynn Drake submitted a 250 name petition to Salford Council in protest over the alarming rise of speeding cars and heavy goods vehicles cutting through side streets across the ward.

Residents of Seedley Park Road, Lower Seedley Road & Seedley Terrace in particular have had to put up with their streets being used as rat runs and short cuts by motorists trying to avoid traffic jams on Langworthy Road and HGVs delivering to the new Willow Tree Primary School and the surrounding house clearance demolition.

Local residents have had enough of late night car crashes on their streets and this petition was the final straw for some. We are glad the council has finally seen sense and approved two schemes to slow down the traffic.

I’ve always stood up for free, fair and unbiased reporting as I believe it’s one of the things that makes this country great. To stand up and speak the truth is, I think, a universal right. The Egyptian people are struggling with this same problem as we speak, their media’s right to free speech was quashed yesterday when the popular news network Al Jazeera was banned from broadcast.

So it with disdain that I read in our local paper, The Salford Advertiser, the week before last about how the Langworthy ward contained the most benefit claimants compared to the rest of Salford. Whilst this snippet of information is true, the article written by Salford Advertiser reporter Denise Evans was slanted (along with unhelpful comments from Langworthy Labour ward Councillor John Warmisham) to suggest that because Langworthy had the highest number of benefit claimants, they therefore must all be benefit cheats.

The Langworthy article was poorly constructed to sensationalise a statistic that exists purely because of the geographical and diverse community that we have in Langworthy, compared to say Worsley and Boothstown (which the article helpfully points out has the lowest benefit claimants).

My letter, which was published in last week’s Salford Advertiser readers viewpoints page, addressed some of the problems with the assumptions in the original article and I won’t repeat those words here.

Manchester Evening News

It was doubly disappointing to therefore read a Manchester Evening News article written by respected MEN reporter Pamela Welsh (see here), which is basically a government-bashing piece that shows the MEN is decidedly biased in it’s reporting.

To openly support an anti-government petition is surely beyond the remit of The Manchester Evening News – this goes beyond mere news reporting and comment; it is making the news itself.

Pamela Welsh and The Manchester Evening News should withdraw “support” for this petition and merely report on it. If they do not, I cannot take anything they write as the truth, but merely the opinion of an anti-community and anti-government mouthpiece.

Salford and Manchester’s free and fair local paper has died. RIP.

Back in November I wrote here about the cancellation of funding from the NWDA for phase II of the Quays Gateway Masterplan, which involved moving the old and disused Quays Cargo Cranes to the M602 roundabout and the construction of three key ‘supercrossings’ that would be built across Trafford Road directly in front of the new Oasis Academy at MediaCity:UK.

When the Manchester Evening News suggested that the whole plan had been scrapped, suddenly Salford Council came to the rescue and claimed the MEN had it all wrong (even forcing the paper to print a retraction and withdraw online versions of the articles) and that the Cranes had been saved after all. Salford Council generously offered to fund the continuation of phase II of the Quays Gateway Plan – minus the Trafford Road supercrossings.

A despicable plan has been hatched, and it would seem this plan was in motion as far back as November of last year when Ordsall & Langworthy Neighbourhood Officer Ross Spanner suggested that the community committee would have to consider funding the supercrossings from it’s road safety budget, following the withdrawal of funding from the NWDA.

So, in exactly 7 days time on January 11th (6.45pm), the Ordsall & Langworthy Committee will be asked to exhaust it’s road safety budget to pay for three supercrossings that Oasis Academy should have been forced to build as part of their planning application.

Further, if Salford Council can afford to fund the moving of 2 lumps of old, rusting metal to “pretty up” a roundabout but cannot fund essential life-saving supercrossings that would protect our children – they they have their sums wrong (at the very least their priorities).

I’m asking every resident of Langworthy if they think this is right. Please do your best to attend next week’s community committee meeting and send the council a message that we will not be manipulated in this way.

There are far too many road safety schemes that need the community committee’s attention to be exhausting our budget on a scheme that should have been paid for by Oasis Academy and could be paid for by Salford Council.

What do you think? Cranes or Crossings?

Blogging has been thin on the ground these last few months (a new year’s resolution may be in order to rectify that), but it seems that a new year has not brought a ‘new’ Labour. In fact, quite the opposite.

Nationally, we see Labour claiming the VAT rise is “the wrong tax at the wrong time” – and while I’m no fan of the VAT rise, I do remember Alistair Darling publicly discussing the need to bring in a rise of 19%. Just what would Labour have done if they’d won the election (or, god forbid participated in a coalition)? We’ll never know, Labour’s blank page is still waiting for a drop of ink.

Locally, Salford’s Labour are no better. The end of the year saw disaster after disaster: Salford Childrens Services being rated poor (the lowest possible rating), the previously excellent Adult Care suffered badly under the new stewardship of Langworthy Councillor John Warmisham and a dodgy land deal was done with Tesco.

The £4m under-the-counter “deposit” by Tesco as part-payment for land in Pendleton adjacent to the Precinct could be tantamount to a bribe, but to subsequently discover the land itself has probably been undervalued by possibly a further £10m suggests a return to the sinister and backhanded corruption that I personally always thought was the writings of  TV fiction.

I’ve submitted a Freedom of Information Request to attempt to find out which officers knew about the £4m payment and, if it’s even suggested anyone on the planning panel knew about this, I intend to report this whole sorry saga to the Council’s Standards Board.

Don’t for a minute think I am against the new Tesco at Pendleton, I’m not. But I am against council corruption.

This year, I’ll be standing as the Liberal Democrat candidate in May’s Salford Local Elections – where it’ll be my intention to route out corruption like this and expose the guilty. With more opposition councillors on the council, I’ll have more chance to reduce Labour’s waste and ensure we return our Adult Care & Childrens Services to the effective departments they have the potential to be.

It’s time once again to update the local community committee’s priorities for next year and we want to hear what you think. Last year our priorities ranged from Improving health and reducing crime all the way through to initiatives for investing in young people,  encouraging learning and creating prosperity.

You can email me your thoughts at steve@stevemiddleton.info, use the contact me page here or simply leave your comments below. Your comments can be anonymous if you wish, but I’ll make sure all suggestions are heard by the committee.

At the Ordsall & Langworthy Community Committee on 2^nd November Neighbourhood Manager Ross Spanner confirmed that funding is in place and secured for new fencing that will close off Chimney Pot Park from dusk until dawn. Regular readers of my blog will remember that this has been a contentious issue, with residents divided over whether to close off the park or provide better lighting, which would have made it safer to keep it open.

A consultation event was carried out by Seedley and Langworthy Trust (SALT) and after a worrying delay of a couple of months, ratified by the community committee. The majority of people who responded to the consultation decided in favour of closing off the park and erecting fencing to keep it secure. It was felt this would remove trouble makers involved in drugs & other crimes from the park and help protect Chimney Pot Park streets below from the constant problem of stones thrown at cars/windows from the elevated position of the park.

There is no definite date when the fencing will be installed, but Ross assured us it would not be too long.

Whilst browsing through recent planning applications/decisions today (sad, I know), I was disappointed to come across an application from Lark Hill Primary School on Liverpool street. The headmaster of Lark Hill (Liam Fry) proposes to build a new extension to the school (presumably to cope with the extra pupils the school is due to receive thanks to the incompetence of Salford’s Labour Council and their barmy decision to build a replacement school too small for the 2010/11 intake).

Why am I disappointed? Well, one word: Consultation.

Lark Hill have failed to consult it’s neighbours on this building plan which directly affects hundreds of Langworthy/Pendleton/Clarendon residents.

I’m sure the local community would have had very little problem with the proposal to expand Lark Hill Primary School, but common courtesy would be to behave a tad better and talk about the plans with your neighbours.

For those interested, the plans can be viewed here (but the application has been permitted, so no further comment can be made).

Shame on you Mr Fry, be a bit more neighbourly in future.

Yesterday afternoon I attended The Salford Garden Party at the Civic Centre in Swinton. This annual event is designed to promote, amongst other things, the services Salford City Council has to offer it’s residents. As someone interested in local politics, the highlight of the Garden Party is “The Big Ask”, where ordinary people like you and me have the opportunity to question our city’s councillors and leaders on, well, pretty much anything we like.

Last year I attended and queried Councillor Merry on my pet hate of potholes, but my intention was simply to listen this year – since I’m hoping in the not too distant future, I’ll be the one answering the questions.

While this year’s questions covered a wide range of topics, all night I’ve been struggling with Derek Antrobus’ answer to one posed regarding the council’s decision to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds on the Christmas Ice Rink. When asked, Councillor Antrobus defended the near-£200,000 spend on a month’s worth of subsidised ice-skating by stating it provided youngsters something to do and was a healthy activity.

Yet the Council had the opportunity to continue to fund free swimming beyond 29^th August for under-17s at an annual cost to the city of almost £200,000 (Since free swimming was introduced in Salford there were over 150,000 visits to pools by young people. The government grant for free swimming for 2009/10 was £196,287 – source Salford Star). In fact, the free swimming government grant ended on 31^st July and Salford Council decided to fund it for a further month (until the end of the summer holidays), so they clearly understood the long term value of free swimming for young people.

So, Councillor Antrobus, your argument for supporting the Ice Rink for a few weeks of “exercise and something to do” doesn’t quite stack up when the same money could have been spent providing free swimming for an entire year for those same youngsters. Perhaps the flashy ice rink with it’s stays-on-all-day-and-all-night lighting ticks more marketing check-boxes than free swimming for non-voters?

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a letter to the Salford Advertiser’s “readers’ viewpoint” page in reponse to Blackley & Broughton MP Graham Stringer’s column. It was printed in this week’s edition (albeit edited down to the required 300 words), but unfortunately the Editor has decided not to attribute the letter to me, even though I provided my name, address and permission to print both.

Here is the complete unexpurgated response to Graham Stringer’s column on the Alternative Vote:

I was astonished to read Graham Stringer’s column in last week’s Advertiser (Thursday 29^th July) where he announced he would be voting against the introduction of the Alternative Vote (AV) in next year’s referendum.

In this year’s general election, Mr Stringer’s party campaigned on a manifesto pledge to introduce AV immediately and then later to hold a referendum on Proportional Representation. Clearly, this promise was an act of political opportunism, designed to facilitate a coalition deal with the Liberal Democrats in the event of a hung Parliament. No wonder Mr Stringer’s party are so bitter about the outcome.

Labour was the only party to make such a pledge yet, as a party, they are now vehemently against the policy. Then again, the Labour Party has never been particularly fastidious about observing manifesto pledges. One example was its promise at the 2005 general election to hold a national referendum on the new EU constitution, only to abandon the idea once safely re-elected. That act of calculated cynicism is about to be replicated, once again on a major constitutional issue.

Mr Stringer and his party accuse the coalition of ‘gerrymandering’, a word which in the past has been used to describe how the voting system has been used to exclude Catholics in Northern Ireland, or black and poor people in the United States, from exercising their rights. The accusation is one of the most serious any party can make as it is tantamount to an accusation of electoral corruption.

AV is not wrong or illegal nor is it less proportionate than our current first past the post system. Indeed AV is used all over the world in such countries as Australia, Ireland, Scotland and even some American Mayoral elections use the AV system. Nor is it wrong to adjust constituency boundaries which, at present, only benefit Labour (possibly to the tune of an extra 5-7% of votes). The truth of the matter is that Labour is keen to protect an electoral system that favours large parties and disenfranchises voters, they are also keen to protect the current constitutional boundaries that favour Labour.

In trying to explain his position Mr Stringer has taken Winston Churchill’s comments about democracy and misused them, I believe because he did not understand what Churchill was saying: progress is good and if you don’t change or develop then you’ll never have a better system of democracy. Churchill did not say that what comes later is worse; he said that whatever comes after is an improvement.

Finally, in his column, Mr Stringer drew attention to some 3.5 million potential voters that are unregistered in this country and stated that some of those people are unlikely to vote Conservative, implying some sort of conspiracy. Two things occurred to me when I read this most ridiculous comment: firstly, unless Mr Stringer has developed telepathic powers, he has no idea how those 3.5 million people would be likely to vote; secondly, if those 3.5 million people are so unlikely to vote Conservative why, after thirteen years of government, didn’t Mr Stringer’s party do more to ensure that they were registered to vote? Furthermore, none of the proposed changes will prevent these 3.5 million people from registering to vote in the future, making Mr Stringer’s comments all the more ridiculous.

But why would I expect a fair debate and accurate information from someone who denies the existence of dyslexia, a condition which is very real to the 6m dyslexia sufferers in the UK today? That Mr Stringer denies the existence of dyslexia, which affects 10% of his constituents, is not that surprising when you consider he denies that AV and PR are fairer voting systems that would ensure more electors’ votes count in an election.

I have written to my own MP, Hazel Blears, asking her to support AV in next year’s referendum and urge Mr Stringer to stop thinking about himself and vote with his conscience, for the benefit of those he claims to represent.

It seems that buildings are falling down all over Salford. If the council aren’t tearing them down in the name of “regeneration” then council-owned buildings are falling down, due to poor maintenance (or lack thereof). Case in point, a row of shops on Liverpool Street in Langworthy (adjacent to Seedley Primary School).

The shops have been vacant for many years and the council has been unable to let them, latterly because they have been uninhabitable. The picture above (taken courtesy of Google Streetview) is by my reckoning at least a couple of years old, and you can see how bad things were then.

So it should not have come as a total surprise yesterday morning when I arrived home from my night shift at 7am to see a pile of bricks strewn across the pavement and road. I was far too tired after a 10hr shift which started at 9.30pm the previous day to stop and take a picture, but as soon as I arrived home I made sure there was a message waiting for Lib Dem Langworthy Councillor Lynn Drake.

Thanks to Lynn’s efforts, by 9am the council had inspected and now it looks like some of the block is to be demolished.

This pathetic way than Salford Council have of handling their extensive property portfolio so annoys me. They seem to have no understanding that these building are assets, not problems to be ignored (and then finally destroyed when their failure to maintain them results in a collapse).

Do the council not realise that as well as the financial cost of ignoring building maintenance there is the personal cost to residents? Neighbours of mine could have been injured or possibly killed if the building had collapsed if someone was walking by at that moment. I would not even like to speculate on how many rats are probably inside the end building, which as I mentioned, is next door to Seedley Primary School.

I hope that the council will move quickly to solve this problem – both the short term and long term needs of the site. Let’s remember, if this building had been in private hands, surely Salford Council themselves would have begun legal action to force the owner to make the building safe and secure.

While I note Salford’s Labour council is supporting the evil empire that is Tesco on their application to build a new store on Fitzwarren Street in Pendleton, they seem to have completely forgotten about the little shops.

Or maybe they just don’t care for the small businessman?

It’s been a bad week for Children in Salford. At the start of the week, St. James RC Primary School in Pendleton was the subject of an arson attack, which saw the roof severely damaged – but thanks to the quick response and bravery of local firefighters, the damage was contained and valuable equipment and school work was saved.

On Thursday, the Salford Advertiser & Manchester Evening News broke the story that I had feared could happen again. Earlier in May of this year, OfSted inspected Salford’s Childrens Services and it seems the report is going to, once again, rate the service as inadequate.

This is the second time Salford’s Childrens Services has been rated inadquate by OfSted, both times under the stewardship of Langworthy Councillor John Warmisham. After the last inadequate rating, the council gave undertakings to the government it would improve the service (and briefly it did). Now, if the MEN article is correct, the council’s efforts have failed and our looked-after children are once again at risk.

I call on our new coalition government to take decisive action and step in to take control of Salford’s Childrens Services and rescue things before another, inevitable, death occurs. I do not want another Demi-Leigh Mahon case hitting the Advertiser’s front page – but it’s obvious to me that Salford Council cannot be trusted to take care of our children at the moment. The department needs radical overhaul – I do not know what that means in terms of staffing, Jill Baker (former strategic director of Childrens Services) was sacked, Chief Executive Barbara Spicer took over temporarily and then handed the reigns over to Jill Baker’s former deputy, Nick Page.

Further, if the Salford Labour cabinet will not take former Lead Member for Childrens Services John Warmisham to task,then I would hope that local Conservatives and Salford Liberal Democrats can come together to push for a full investigation into what has gone wrong.

As I look across my road to the newly-built Willow Tree Primary school due to open in September, I worry what will happen to those children that didn’t make it into the new school (because it is too small to occupy all the pupils who currently learn at the four schools it replaces). I worry about how our looked-after children are cared for in Salford Council’s childrens homes.

And I fear for Adult Social Care, John Warmisham’s new post in the cabinet. After the disasters he has left behind him at Childrens Services and Housing before that, things do not bode well for Salford’s older people.

At around 1.30am last night/this morning, I was awoken from a sound sleep by an almighty crash from outside. It’s the kind of sound you know is so, so, wrong. On examining the scene it became clear that a Toyota had hit the metal barrier opposite my house, chopped a concrete post in half, lost it’s bumper, rode up the barrier and then buried itself into my neighbours Clio – writing both cars off.

How the car hasn’t flipped onto it’s roof or smashed into my own car, I will never know. How the occupants survived the incident, only they know that.

For far too long we’ve had to put up with heavy traffic on Seedley Park Road, if it’s not the heavy goods vehicles delivering materials to the new Willow Tree Primary School currently undergoing construction a few yards from my house, it’s speeding ‘boy racers’ who see my street as a race track and speed bumps as nothing more than a challenge.

The junction outside my house is a nightmare. Clearly, the design looked great on a piece of paper, but in the real world – it just does not work. Anything larger than a family saloon car must drive onto the wrong side of the road to turn right, lest they hit the illuminated barrier in the middle of the road. Most of the HGVs that turn from Glendinning Street onto Seedley Park Road, block the road trying to make it around the tight corner (whilst performing the manouvre on the wrong side of the road).

Everyone survived last night’s accident, but how long before a speeding car or HGV kills a child on Seedley Park Road? I worry it could happen.

That’s why over the next few days you will see me at your door, calling on my neighbours to sign a petition which I intend to present at the next council meeting. I am asking for a weight restriction to be put in place on Seedley Park Road and Lower Seedley Road and I’ll be looking for highways to try and help prevent incidents such as the one last night from costing lives.

Last night I attended our first Ordsall & Langworthy Community Committee meeting since the election. From a representative point of view, nothing has changed. All 6 Ordsall & Langworthy councillors remain the same (since neither of the 2 up for re-election lost their seats) and our first point of business was to elect our community committee chairman, who also retained his position. Congratulations to Roy Marsh, he guides us through the busy agenda with a good degree of skill.

It has always slightly annoyed me that as a mere resident, representing no one group, while my voice can be heard along with all of the others in the room when it comes to discussing topics on the agenda – I do not have a vote when it comes to making community committee decisions. The rule is: you must be a ‘member’ of the committee to vote. Membership is open to elected members (I tried so hard!) and representatives of residents associations and other partner groups.

Therefore I was extremely upset and annoyed when the next agenda item for consideration by the community committee was the ‘approval of a decision to lock Chimney Pot Park from dawn until dusk’. After a lengthy, but thorough consultation which involved the entire ward (and beyond), the overwhelming result of the public consultation was to close off Chimney Pot Park at night. Without going into the problems that troublemakers have caused by congregating in the park at night – the residents of CPP have, quite frankly, had enough of the anti-social behaviour brought about by a minority of idiots in the park after dark.

Residents want the park closed at night. Personally, I voted for the alternative option (which was to light the park instead), but I respect democracy. I respect the 68% of people who out-voted me. Why then, would the community committee want to ignore the 68%? Simply, they did not like the idea of locking a park at night.

With no thought to the people enduring a living hell, who have to live through the constant onslaught of stone and bricks thrown against their windows & cars from the elevated position of the park, the ‘voting members’ of the community committee decided to ignore a full and proper consultation – intending to overrule local residents wishes.

At this point I made an impassioned plea to the voting members to re-consider and think about the problems of the area and more importantly what the residents of CPP wanted. I’m afraid all I think I have achieved is to hold off the decision for a couple of months – since after some heated debate with a voting member from the Pendleton/Broadwalk area, it was decided to defer the decision until the next community committee meeting in July (where Neighbourhood Manager Ross Spanner will present a full report on the consultation, including actual numbers of people who responded).

It is my profound wish that Chimney Pot Park has re-established it’s residents association by the time of the next community committee meeting, since if they have, they would be entitled to vote on this very important matter.

I cannot fathom why we should (and do) allow people from outside the area make decisions in our area. The only two ward councillors who attended the meeting both live outside Langworthy, yet they were granted full voting rights. Members of residents associations from Pendleton and Islington Estate were also allowed to vote, yet I, someone who lives close by the park, was not. Nor was their anybody present from Chimney Pot Park itself to either speak or vote.

Voting members of the community committee should remember why they are there – to help make the area better for local people. They have a unique privilege in voting, and therefore a unique responsibility to think beyond what they want themselves and represent the unheard population who need their wishes and requirements met.

As I’m sure most readers of my blog are aware by now, I did not win in Langworthy, while I am obviously disappointed not to win, I offer my congratulations to John Warmisham. While I am sure John is pleased with his victory, I have every intention of continuing to fight for Langworthy and I’m very happy with my 1,211 votes (which was more than Lynn Drake polled in 2008 when she won here).

Further, I hope John joins me in thanking the electorate for a record turnout in Langworthy – I’d like to think that both the intensive Labour and Lib Dem campaigning in our ward over the last few months contributed to the fact that more local electors engaged in the process. I found it incredibly frustrating last year (when I stood in Irwell Riverside) that only 17% bothered to vote. Look at it this year, 43.5%. That’s great news for the city, I really hope we can maintain (and maybe improve on) these turnout figures.

Elsewhere across Salford, it was a disappointing night for the Liberal Democrats. We lost 2 seats (Mary Ferrer in Claremont and John Deas in Weaste & Seedley). Both were shocks for us, but it upsets me to think that the city has lost 2 really good councillors. Our two main targets of Swinton South and Langworthy saw us come close, but there are no prizes for second place!

If there is one saving grace for us, it is that our own data shows that, broadly, the local election results mirrored the general election results – which simply means electors voted in both elections wearing their “general election hats”. I firmly believe that in next year’s local elections, the trend will reverse somewhat and we’ll see voters thinking nothing but locally.

The Salford Liberal Democrats are here to stay. We’re a committed and great bunch of people who genuinely care about our city. We will be back.

Every weekend for the last few months the team has been meeting up at 10am and 2pm on both Saturday and Sunday as our campaign to get Norman Owen elected moved into top gear. There has also been the small matter of the council seats we are defending, plus several targets we are confident of stealing from under Labour’s noses.

It was therefore extremely pleasing this morning to see I had been beaten to the office by half the Salford Lib Dem team who were all raring to go – what was even more gratifying was the 4 new volunteers that came down to help the Langworthy and Ordsall campaigns. With only 5 days to go, I’d like to note the invaluable help of our 4 new helpers: Jane, Anthony, Andrew and Michael.

The extra help added the already dedicated team meant we were able to hit two entire wards today, with plenty already planned for tomorrow.

So, if anyone else can spare an hour of your time over the bank holiday weekend, please feel free to drop by the office at 10am and 2pm on both Sunday and Bank Holiday Monday, where you’ll find a dedicated team stuffing their bags with leaflets for delivery all across Salford.

I look forward to seeing you there!

Updates to my blog have been a bit thin on the ground lately, but the campaigning has not stopped! In between bunches of 11 hour shifts at work (including a night shift that screwed my body clock up for days after), leafletting/canvassing and attending the various hustings/debates with General Election candidates there has been little time for blogging.

Last night I set the Sky+ to record the Leader’s Debates and headed off to Irlam to lend my support to Richard Gadsden, the Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Candidate for Worsley & Eccles South. Since most of our efforts are going into the Salford & Eccles campaign, where Norman Owen is likely to oust Hazel Blears – Richard hasn’t had the benefit of much support from the local party. In fact, Richard was leafletting in Swinton South yesterday morning! Therefore, I felt it only right that a couple of Lib Dem members stopped by to say hello and listen to the debate.

It was good to chat with Jackie Anderson and Pamela Welsh prior to the debate – both are to be applauded for their respective organisation and participation in the Irlam & Cadishead Question Time (which Jackie admits was inspired by the recent Seedley & Langworthy Question Time debates in Langworthy).

The subjects were varied and wide-ranging, from the obvious local environment issues, war in Iraq/Afghanistan, interational aid and even a question about “the 3 pillars of sustainability” (to which I admit, I had no idea what they were until I Googled them).

Richard showed he had a sound knowledge of Lib Dem policy and was able to articulate that into well spoken answers that I’m sure the audience could relate to, although I was dissapointed that Tory candidate Iain Lindley and Sale-based Worsley MP Barbara Keeley argued about leaflet lies and I still don’t know which of them is telling the truth about SureStart centres!

In any event, it was a good night for democracy and it was therefore fitting that Kat and I returned home to watch the Sky News Leaders Debate, which we had earlier set to record. One thing struck me as we watched, how similar the pre-prepared answers were of Iain Lindley and David Cameron. I was hoping that, like Richard Gadsden and Nick Clegg, politicians vying to be our future leaders would understand their party policies and articulate them in language that the audience could understand. But no, David Cameron and Iain Lindley had learned their manifestos parrot-fashion and felt it acceptable to reel it off, page by page.

Of course, at least Lindley, Gadsden and Keeley knew what their manifestos contained, unlike the UKIP candidate who, at times, seemed to desperately search his notes for answers (they weren’t there). The English Democrat representative was not much better – they were easily the poorest on the panel and well out of their depth.

Once again, a big thank you to Jackie Anderson for organising the Irlam & Cadishead Question Time and Salford Advertiser reporter Pamela Welsh for chairing the hustings. Next time Pamela, be more assertive