Welcome to Liverpool Confidential
Reset Password
The Confidential websites will be undergoing routine updates. This may cause the sites to go offline. We apologise in advance for any inconvenience.

You are here: Liverpool ConfidentialNews & Comment.

City councillors form historic coalition to fight green space sell-off

Greens, Lib Dems and Jake Morrison unite - that"s 10 against 79

Written by . Published on November 5th 2014.


City councillors form historic coalition to fight green space sell-off
 

IN a rare show of strength, every opposition councillor on Liverpool City Council has united a cross-party coalition to challenge proposals by the dominant Labour group to flog city parklands and open spaces.

Even the combined force of the dissenters – 10 councillors, representing the Greens, Lib Dems, Liberals and independent Jake Morrison – will not be enough to overcome the power of the ruling  79-strong administration.

But they are hoping that by demonstrating a show of strength, rare if not unique in living memory, they will send a Bonfire Night rocket to Labour to say the people of Liverpool want a halt called on controversial land deals.

These include plans that could see Walton Hall Park being handed to Everton FC for a stadium to replace Goodison and the already-agreed scheme that would mean Sefton Park’s meadowlands being sold for luxury housing.

The only non-Labour councillor not signing a move to be debated at next week’s full meeting of the city council is Lib Dem Erica Kemp. By convention she has to remain apolitical during her year of office as Lord Mayor.

'Sneak'

But her husband, Lib Dem Leader Cllr Richard Kemp, was more vocal:  “From Jericho Lane in the south to Walton Hall Park in the north, via Sefton Park, Calderstones Park, Newsham Park and Wavertree, our green heritage is threated by a Labour Group.... Were we to have a referendum on these issues the people of Liverpool would vote heavily against these proposals. Labour are going to try and sneak them through”.

The historic resolution has been signed by Cllrs Richard Kemp (LD) Barbara Mace (LD), Steve Radford (Lib), Kevin Morrison (Lib), Hazel Williams  (Lib), Jake Morrison (Ind), John Coyne (Green), Laurence Brown (Green), Tom Crone (Green), Sarah Jennings (Green).

That call to action from the 10 in full

Clubmoor Recreation Ground Earmarked For DevelopmentClubmoor Recreation Ground Earmarked For Development

The lengthy motion from the 10 non-Labour councillors on the order paper states: "Council notes with concern that within the response to the Consultation on the Local Plan that council officers have listed a large number of sites currently used for green open space purposes as being suitable for development for housing.

"It notes that the Council is currently negotiating the sale of land at Sefton Park Meadowlands and is proposing to sell of the whole of Walton Hall Park for development.

"It notes that the Riding for the Disabled Association has received a written assurance that the move to Clarke Gardens which will necessitate the provision of new stables, paddocks and exercise yard will be financed from the sale of the land which the RDA currently occupies in Calderstones Park.

"It notes that a requirement of the Local Plan is that a plentiful supply of land for housing purposes needs to be identified. It believes that land has already been identified in Liverpool in the Mayoral Development Zones, North and South Docks and other brown field land within the city formerly occupied by housing to meet the 15 year horizon required by the Local Plan process even though not all this is currently formerly listed for housing.

"It notes however that the population of the City has started to rise and that it is doing so because Liverpool is now seen to be a green and pleasant city with a vibrant city centre and an improving economic and educational outlook.

"Council believes that Liverpool will need all its current green space if it is to adequately cope with the planned growth in population and accordingly:

1.      Requests the Mayor to rescind his recent decision to sell Sefton Park Meadowlands and similarly withdraw the outline  proposals he has made for the redevelopment of Walton Hall Park

2.      Requests council officers to work with local residents to redevelop the former MANWEB site in Wavertree primarily for Community Sports use.

3.      Requests council officers to enter into negotiations with the Riding for the Disabled Association to allow for a long term lease for the current site in Calderstones Park to enable them to attract funds to enhance the facilities at that location.

4.      Instructs officers to cease to consider the use of part of Woolton Woods for the development of St Julie’s School and to find alternative methods for the redevelopment of the school.

5.      Resolves that all land zoned for green space uses within the current Urban Development Plan be designated as such within the prosed Local Development Framework unless officers can identify other land in the vicinity of such land which could be ‘swapped’ for current green space if a specific need has been identified.

 

In particular the pieces of land at or near:

·         Maiden Lane Playing Fields

·         Cherry Lane Recreation Ground, Walton

·         Clubmoor Recreation Ground North, Walton

·         Newsham Park

·         Ye Priory, Allerton

·         Detached playing Fields, Tramway Road

The  10 councillors want council officers from appropriate departments to liaise with appropriate resident and campaign groups to ensure that suitable uses and ownership and leases for the areas be developed to ensure their long-term use for green spaces."

Like what you see? Enter your email to sign up for our newsletters which are chock-a-block with more great reviews, news, deals and savings.

51 comments so far, continue the conversation, write a comment.

Katie54November 5th 2014.

They should work together a lot more - in particular, to make sure that next year's local council election is fought on local issues, by selectively targeting some wards to remove some of the Labour sheep.

John BradleyNovember 5th 2014.

Who is the captain of this ship of fools?

2 Responses: Reply To This...
Katie54November 5th 2014.

Why do they need a captain? I appreciate in the Liverpool Labour Party people have and presumably need a "captain" to tell them what to do and how to think, but that's not actually the case for everyone else.

John BradleyNovember 5th 2014.

I don't think that you appreciate anything in the Liverpool Labour party, because I group disagree with you you assume it is because they are being bullied rather than actually being of like mind. I appreciate you regard anyone who doesn't agree with you as being duped. The one thing this statement is full of is calls to stop, no new ideas, no ways of paying for the things they want.

AnonymousNovember 5th 2014.

Typical John Bradley, the guy no-one has ever met. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

2 Responses: Reply To This...
John BradleyNovember 5th 2014.

You mean you have never met and extrapolate that to mean everyone.

AnonymousNovember 5th 2014.

but would you really want to meet him?

mickeydrippin'November 5th 2014.

I believe that nobody in Liverpool- not even Joe Anderson - wants to see every bit of green space developed for housing. However, the Government has instructed every Council to consider ways in which more housing can be provided. Hence, Joe and his Council colleagues have to look at all under-used sites in Liverpool (both brown and green), where new homes could possibly be built. As a consequence, people are now jumping up and down, thinking that just because their local park has appeared on a list, houses are definitely going to built on it. In my opinion, of all those listed by the Council, perhaps only one or two unused greenfield sites will be developed. So many people are needlessly worrying.

AnonymousNovember 5th 2014.

The argument that all the green spaces on the list are under-used is nonsense. Who decided this? How did they do it? What evidence did they use? In reality, it's a wishlist of sites that developers have their eye on. Property developers - and their mouthpiece, Frank McKenna, want to build on our greenspace because it's very very profitable. And they appear to have the ear of the Mayor. This was clear months ago, when the Meadowlands proposal came to light - well before this list came out. It was and is a disgraceful proposition, which they have attempted to justify with spurious and idiotic arguments - "they will pay more council tax" (no they won't), "we need to attract people to move into the city" (except there is no shortage of lovely houses in areas with great amenities already). The housing problem here is about quality affordable housing. The council needs to be focussing more on bringing some empty homes back into use instead of allowing developers to make money out of our amenities. It gets exactly the same cash reward from the government for doing this as it does for building new ones. But it isn't about housing at all - it's about lazy and inept people doing the easy thing - flogging assets, to plug holes in their budget. Because this, like closing libraries is far easier than cutting costs and their own salaries and perks - or actually earning their pay by clawing back millions of pounds they shouldn't have paid to LDL. Lazy, incompetent, self-serving carpetbaggers.

1 Response: Reply To This...
HecNovember 6th 2014.

You are correct in all you say. These 'lazy, incompetent, self-serving carpetbaggers', as you say, do nothing except kow-tow to the mayor. They are worse than eunuchs. Worst thing of all is the belief that somehow the government will choose Liverpool over Manchester for its northern assembly HQ. Get real!

AnonymousNovember 7th 2014.

It would seem Labour are rattled by the above article, claiming they are doing no more the performing a government exercise by writing a 'local plan'. So if the sites listed won't be built on (!) why are they there, some of the sites in the council motion (ie Meadowlands, St Julies, Walton Hall Park) have sod all to do with the local plan, they are bits of green spaces already destined to be taken, or in the case of Walton Hall Park, likely to be taken if Everton process the plan. The rants here and elsewhere of Labour people speak volumes about their bullying. Can anyone really, really, really believe that seventy-plus Labour councillors are all in agreement with what is happening? or are they just sh*t scared to stand up and tell the leadership to do one. For once the opposition has got its act together, and Labour just doesn't like it. Wait until Wednesday, and one by one they will all be wound up and programmed to slam the opposition. OK, you would expect the LDs to fight things, maybe even Greens or even Libs, but for them all to stand together on behalf of the people of Liverpool who don't want to see their beautiful green spaces flogged, is wonderful. You probably won't win on Wednesday, but youve for sure given them a bloody nose. Moral: the green spaces are not Labours to sell, they belong to all the citizens.

2 Responses: Reply To This...
AnonymousNovember 7th 2014.

They should be rattled. Actions speak louder than words. Flogging off public assets to the private sector is what Tories do, and they should be thinking about why Anderson appears to believe that doing what a particularly greedy part of the private sector (i.e. developers and their lobbyists) wants is right. No wonder Cameron was praising him yesterday - belligerent but empty rhetoric about the awfulness of the cuts in public, and Tory-type cronyism in private. Playing to the crowd, but treating them with contempt behind the scenes.

John BradleyNovember 7th 2014.

You seem delusional.

AnonymousNovember 7th 2014.

Let this be seen as the day Labour was given its marching orders. Good riddance, lets have a LD/Lib/Green/Indy coalition to run Liverpool for all the people.

John EdmondsonNovember 7th 2014.

The motion would be a little more convincing if the word 'formerly' were replaced by 'formally' - as published here it doesn't make a lot of sense!

2 Responses: Reply To This...
Katie54November 7th 2014.

You've misunderstood. They don't mean formally. The brown field sites they are referring to were not "formally" occupied by housing, they really did have houses on them. In the past. Formerly.

AnonymousNovember 7th 2014.

How to make a complete nob of yourself in one statement and be knocked off the podium of grammatical pomposity!

AnonymousNovember 7th 2014.

most of the "green space" in question in used mainly as dog toilets! there are bigger areas within walking distance to enjoy green open space if required that is used, this is never mentioned as it detracts from the ranters case!

AnonymousNovember 7th 2014.

dont build houses on the green spaces let the ranters move in and live in tents on it and let the Council become bankrupt!

AnonymousNovember 7th 2014.

These green spaces act as the lungs of the city and recreational spaces for underpriveleged people who cannot afford to go away for holidays etc This I believe wae the basis of the Wavertree Mystery /wavertree park This has always been very well used for many years and for many reasons.. What is the legality of selling of what was really a trust ?

AnonymousNovember 7th 2014.

Lungs of the city? Any more tired old clichés?

1 Response: Reply To This...
Katie54November 9th 2014.

It may well be a cliché, that does not mean that it isn't true.

Josie MullenNovember 7th 2014.

Well if all the Labour councillors are "like-minded" I.e. think in the same way as Anderson- God help us all! He never consults local people. People living near Walton Hall Park found out about the Everton stadium plans when they appeared on the front page of the Liverpool Echo. The Local Plan says quite clearly that parks,green wedge and green open space should be protected - bullshit . Anderson will sell what he wants,when he wants. Ooh! we are not allowed to know how much he got for Millenium House .Ooh! we are not allowed to see the Dutch report on the liner terminal cock-up.Ooh! We are not allowed to see the report byKPMG on their serious questions about record keeping and accounting in Liverpool Direct. Anderson has always backed Liverpool Direct since he became mayor and yet he now says that if he brings the services in-house £10.000.000 can be saved. He was told that years ago when LCC spent £250.000 on a Liverpool Direct report. Does he think we are all stupid!

Emma BNovember 8th 2014.

The Council can't even collect the bins. Maybe Joe wants to add a couple of feet to Everton Park with all of the rubbish?

Josie MullenNovember 8th 2014.

Oh yes- if we are talking about the'lungs of the city' , which will never be a tired old cliche as it will always be a biological truth - has Anderson ever been up front about the fact that Liverpool ( as well as all the other cities etc in the Uk) needed to meet minimum EU clean air targets by 2015. I have a copy of the DEFRA report that says Liverpool is 10 YEARS BEHIND and won't meet targets until 2015. Now if Anderson continues his war on green open space and continues to add housing estates and the inevitable addition of cars. ( large luxury houses add between 1.5 - 2.5 cars per house to the area) to already heavy trafficked urban areas, then he certainly won't meet that target. I shall find out the stats for pollution in the city through a FOE request. What's the betting I'll be denied the information,

3 Responses: Reply To This...
AnonymousNovember 8th 2014.

On the edge of my seat now awaiting the stats, just what the city needs, another corpy botherer!

John BradleyNovember 8th 2014.

This biological fact of yours is complete rubbish. Car to produce some references? Luxury Cars 1.5-2.5 cars per house, but the houses are low density to the number of cars per hectare may well be low then for low cost housing.

John BradleyNovember 8th 2014.

This biological fact of yours is complete rubbish. Care to produce some references? Luxury Cars 1.5-2.5 cars per house, but the houses are low density so the number of cars per hectare may well be lower than for low cost housing.

Josie MullenNovember 8th 2014.

Sorry...that should say Liverpool won't meet it minimum clean air targets until2025!!!!!!!!!

1 Response: Reply To This...
John BradleyNovember 8th 2014.

Quick FOI request. How many Cats do you own!!!!!!!!!!

Josie MullenNovember 8th 2014.

Well Mr Anonymous- there are 29,000 deaths annually in the UK through pollution( I didn't make that up. )And Liverpool has one of the highest rates of asthma sufferers and pulmonary diseases( not all caused by smoking) Children suffer the greatest as a lot of pollution is low lying so affecting kids. Yours sincerely 'a copy botherer'

6 Responses: Reply To This...
AnonymousNovember 9th 2014.

So just to get this clear; children suffer more because they are a bit shorter and the pollution swirls around a their level? But adults are above it as they are a bit higher-up, sort of thing? Is that what you are saying?

Katie54November 9th 2014.

Yes. Every single car exhaust gas is denser than air, as are particulates, so the concentrations tend to be higher closer to the ground.

John BradleyNovember 9th 2014.

That shows a lack of understanding of gas law, aerosols, brownian motion, chemistry.

AnonymousNovember 10th 2014.

Temper, temper. The gaps in your education are showing. The gas laws (which is what I presume you are referring to) have nothing to do with it. Nor does Brownian motion, much. As for aerosols, if you are talking about the ones involved in acid rain formation,they're not really relevant here, and for the same reason, chemistry doesn't either, or not very much. Whether or not I understand it. Most health professionals, including the WHO in its guidance, are in agreement that because children are quite literally closer to the ground, and also tend to be more active, they are more exposed to car exhaust gases and high density pollutants. If you can cope with the calculus, the mechanisms of pollutant dispersal are explained in Perry

Katie54November 10th 2014.

Sorry, I hit the wrong key. Perry is a 1988 textbook that I was forced to buy when working on environmental texts 20 years ago. Full title: Air Pollution, the Automobile, and Public Health.

John BradleyNovember 10th 2014.

The main constituents of car exhaust of CO2 and Water vapour. When the CO2 is mixed with the rest of the atmosphere, it density as a single gas has very little to do with its distribution in the lower levels of the atmosphere. The reason children are more at risk is because there systems are developing and exposure to this magnifies the effects of exposure it is nothing to do with the concentration gradient in the atmosphere. You average gas molecule is moving around 200m per sec, they do not hang around Same with particulate the concentration gradient is very shallow. Major problems occur when temperature inversions create a block and the lower levels are effectively separated from the upper as they prevent the upward movement of anything.

Josie MullenNovember 8th 2014.

I must learn to type properly ! That should read "corpy botherer"

Josie MullenNovember 8th 2014.

The biological facts refer to green open space, parks etc being the lungs of a city. There are many reports that back this up - The biological facts refer to the number of extra deaths that are directly and indirectly due to high levels of pollution in urban areas and to the number of people with pulmonary and cardiac conditions whose symptoms are exacerbated by high levels of pollution. In terms of cars. I will give you all the info on this when I go to my office on Monday In terms of Cats are you referring to domesticated Cats, wild Cats or Cat converters in cars?

6 Responses: Reply To This...
John BradleyNovember 8th 2014.

Well if there are so many reports on the effects on air quality of parks then point to one. It should not be difficult. You say when you get into your office, does this meen you are doing this proffesionall? Or on someone else's time

AnonymousNovember 8th 2014.

Open spaces? Oh right, grass - that well known air purifier? Most of the damage is caused by particulate matter, how is grass going to deal with that?

Katie54November 9th 2014.

It is an air purifier, you idiot. Why on earth don't you do some research before spouting this rubbish. Quite apart from the obvious fact that just about any plant contributes to air quality through photosynthesis, the green spaces ignoramuses like you are so keen to build on also have trees, which are very effective at removing particulate matter. There are many scientific references for this. Peer reviewed studies, as opposed to ill-informed ranting in tabloid newspapers etc. Here's a few to get you started: www.accessscience.com/…/BR0116141… Please note that while there is doubt in some quarters (very few) about the existence and causes of global warming there is no debate whatsoever about the role of plants and trees, and their importance for air quality.

AnonymousNovember 9th 2014.

Who invited you in statto?! Still not sure how you have answered the question about PMs, also, try not to get personal

AnonymousNovember 9th 2014.

There's pollution down there, Jim, but not as we know it

John BradleyNovember 9th 2014.

Well, you'll be glad to know the trees are staying, they are protected. The areas that are going are basically lawn, which has little or no value. It also has little or no impacted on global green gases, the majority of the worlds carbon dioxide is consumed and oxygen produced by sea born algae. So Katie as usually you produced a partial argument which does nothing to protect the grass you so love and demonstrates your basic lack of knowledge of what are the important contributing biological biota on the plant. You just spout the normal superficial rubbish of "greens" who haven't actually looked at the underlying facts. Most of which would fooled by green paint.

Josie MullenNovember 8th 2014.

First of all, why are you commenting on this subject if you have absolutely no awareness or knowledge on the matter or have never read any peer reviewed, government or medical reports on this subject. No, it's my own little office, I don't work for anyone else - and to say I might be using time paid for by an employer to follow my interest in these subjects is offensive. I have a website called ' extinction6.com' and my focus is climate change, environmental matters and the illegal trade in wildlife.

AnonymousNovember 8th 2014.

if we listened to the ranters from day one, we would all still be living in caves!

1 Response: Reply To This...
AnonymousNovember 9th 2014.

Is this supposed to be profound, because it isn't. It's unpleasant, unoriginal and contributes absolutely nothing to the discussion. You're a troll.

AnonymousNovember 9th 2014.

Let's stray away for a moment from a stroll past some incidental open space (the Meadowlands!) in Park Lane and head down memory lane. In 1997 Tony Blair swept Labour to power. A year later in one of the biggest ever surprises, Liverpool booted out Labour and placed Mike Storey and the LDs into power at the council. Why was that? Maybe it was because the 'powerful' Labour council had become so out of touch with the people (by not listening to them) they were given their marching orders. As Labour has gained power again, it is up to its old tricks: we have four fifths of the seats in the council chamber which proves the people of Liverpool love us and trust us and agree with every unpopular thing we are doing or intend to do. Well Labour can believe that, but check out the history. Once a controlling party thinks it is so big it doesn't have to listen, it is doomed. Some of the comments being made here an elsewhere by Labour councillors, some sounding like political bullies and loudmouths, point to a clear case of here we go again. At the meeting on Wednesday Labour will be scornful, insulting, etc etc. Instead they should ask themselves why political opponents on the council (LDs, Liberals, Greens and even Councillor Morrison) have joined forces. They haven't done that because they hate Labour, but because they hate what Labour is doing in the name of so-called democracy. Wednesday night could be the beginning of the start of the end of Labours stranglehold. Some may say and about time too. Moral: - listen to the people.

1 Response: Reply To This...
John BradleyNovember 9th 2014.

They have done it because they spy an opportunity to get some PR bunch of self serving creeps. Everyone keeps saying the move is unpopular, but all they can do is point to a very small number of signatures.

AnonymousNovember 11th 2014.

Can I assure Mr Bradley I do not belong to any political party, or action group, I am but an ordinary person, a sole voice in the scale of things. I truly and honestly say in a heartfelt way that we should cherish and look after and respect our beautiful parklands, just as our people have done for well over 100 years. I'm lucky enough to live not far from Sefton Park and enjoy it so much, an escape from a busy working city. When I visit my sister in North Liverpool I say I feel sorry for the lack of open space and decent parkland. Instead of even thinking of handing over a large area of Walton Hall Park to Everton FC, the councillors should be creating new parks. How many families in North Liverpool live in garden-less houses, thousands upon thousands whose play area is the street, no greenery at all. I personally believe the selling of our parklands will haunt the council for generations.

To post this comment, you need to login.Please complete your login information.
OR CREATE AN ACCOUNT HERE..
Or you can login using Facebook.

Latest Rants

Anonymous

I agree with the Councillor. His examples really don't go far enough, because of the complexities…

 Read more
Anonymous

Perhaps a "dolmus" system could be used in the city centre, they work quite well for tourists and…

 Read more
Fairminded

Not price related but sad to see that they are doing away with the Citylink bus. This runs around…

 Read more
Anonymous

Thank you Woo

 Read more

Explore The Site

© Mark Garner t/a Confidential Direct 2017

Privacy | Careers | Website by: Planet Code