Advertiser letters: Spitalfields parish and Bow Liveable Streets
PUBLISHED: 08:30 04 August 2019
Letters, contributions and comments sent in to the Advertiser this week.
Most against Spitalfields parish plan
Will Tuckley, chief executive, Tower Hamlets Council, writes:
Last week's article about the Spitalfields "parish council bid" is rather misleading.
The story leaves the impression that 60 per cent of Spitalfields and Banglatown residents were in favour of the creation of a parish council when in fact the complete opposite is true. It focuses on only the online responses from one part of a two part consultation process. It fails to report that when combined with the paper responses, a clear majority of residents (over 60pc) were opposed to the creation of a parish council.
The article also fails to mention the second consultation, which again showed the majority of residents (63pc) were not supportive of having a parish council. The story makes it appear that the council's decision went against the wishes of residents, when in fact it was in line with them.
Put workers first
You may also want to watch:
Sebestian Wordsworth, St Anne Street, Limehouse, writes:
English Democrats will reduce net immigration to zero through stopping all unskilled and semi-skilled EU and non EU workers from entering the United Kingdom. The UK has no right to import workers from other countries when they need those workers, especially when the UK has high youth unemployment.
Liveable Streets trial
Christy Troy, Bow, writes:
It is very disappointing that the Bow Liveable Streets trial was suspended after just one day due to aggressive behaviour, much of which seems to have been from non-local drivers.
The streets in our borough are overwhelmingly set up to prioritise motor vehicles over other users. Residents bear the brunt of this, with Tower Hamlets having become one of the most driven through boroughs in London, despite only 33per cent of our borough's households having access to a motor vehicle.
The Bow Liveable Streets scheme aims to redress this. A longer trial would have allowed residents and people from outside the borough to adjust and reassess their travel options. Every address in Bow would have remained accessible by car for those who need it, but more through traffic would have been kept on the main roads where it belongs. I urge the borough to implement an ambitious new scheme for Bow.