Who's standing in the Sydenham by election in May?

The place for serious discussion, announcements and breaking news about Sydenham
syd
Posts: 366
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 18:30
Location: lower sydenham

Re: Who's standing in the Sydenham by election in May?

Post by syd »

Hello Jack, what was the process for your selection for this seat?
jack_lavery
Posts: 8
Joined: 27 Feb 2021 15:35

Re: Who's standing in the Sydenham by election in May?

Post by jack_lavery »

syd wrote: 22 Mar 2021 06:40 Hello Jack, what was the process for your selection for this seat?
Hello. Sydenham Labour Party members decide the local candidate. As you’d expect, the associated meetings and voting were done remotely.
Syd_Stone
Posts: 51
Joined: 3 Sep 2009 17:52
Location: Sydenham

Re: Who's standing in the Sydenham by election in May?

Post by Syd_Stone »

Thanks Jack for replying, the magic words (well, letters) “STV” sound good to me.
syd
Posts: 366
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 18:30
Location: lower sydenham

Re: Who's standing in the Sydenham by election in May?

Post by syd »

jack_lavery wrote: 24 Mar 2021 20:29
syd wrote: 22 Mar 2021 06:40 Hello Jack, what was the process for your selection for this seat?
Hello. Sydenham Labour Party members decide the local candidate. As you’d expect, the associated meetings and voting were done remotely.
Great thanks for confirming
JRW
Posts: 434
Joined: 18 Jun 2015 15:01

Re: Who's standing in the Sydenham by election in May?

Post by JRW »

Hi Jack,

Across Lewisham, amenity societies have expressed concerns about the state of planning consultantions, as they have been problematic for many years now. Would you expect societies to publicly represent local concerns, or would you encourage them to stay quiet, and be loyal to the one-party state?

I'd also like to hear the other candidates' positions on this question.
JGD
Posts: 1089
Joined: 5 Feb 2018 11:39
Location: Perry Hill, SE6 (yup - that's Bellingham Ward, includes Bell Green and is distinct from Sydenham)..
Contact:

Re: Who's standing in the Sydenham by election in May?

Post by JGD »

JRW wrote: 8 Apr 2021 15:47 Across Lewisham, amenity societies have expressed concerns about the state of planning consultantions, as they have been problematic for many years now. Would you expect societies to publicly represent local concerns, or would you encourage them to stay quiet, and be loyal to the one-party state?
A good place to start would be to recognise that Civic Amenity societies are on balance probably a very good thing for local communities across a wide spectrum of beneficial activities.

In planning and consultations it could be held that a good society acts as the "third leg" in a rules- based planning system, particularly when the society itself has robust and transparent processes which it uses to engage with its members and the wider community that it purports to represent.

It is essential that it is suitably resourced, is representative and does not exclude the opinions of those with whom it has formed an adversarial relationship and elects to not even to consider their views.

It is crucial that the society does not become introspective where it risks developing an insular collective mindset that leads it to conclude that "it knows best" and instead of collaborating and consulting with its community to establish what the consensus view is before it begins to predetermine outcomes for proposals and lays out these unrepresentative views for rubber-stamping and ultimate publication of such views that are not well founded nor developed in an appropriate consultation base.

The "third leg" concept is a scenario in which three pillars exist in planning and consultation events: a proposer who wants to build or develop a scheme and will be driven by need and supported by professional advice and will want to achieve their goals for the proposed scheme; an LPA who must be seen to approach every application with balance, consistency and openness and has ultimate responsibility to approve or reject applications based upon the proposals conformance to planning policies and rules set in the local context and to police non-conformities for approved schemes; a civic society that in best practice terms should be placed to be the most effective party in its ability to consult and collaborate with its community and present those views to the proposer and LPA, whether those views represent a supportive stance or are non-supportive.

A society should recognise the boundaries of its own geographic areas of benefit and desist and refrain from straying into adjacent areas to formulate and propose pre-defined schemes or pre-set objectives to its neighbours with whom it has conducted no consultation and where it has no representation.

This constraint of course should not prevent any society from commenting on any proposal being developed in a neighbouring area, particularly and specifically if any element of that scheme has a direct and consequential impact on the society's own area of benefit.
Post Reply