16/07/2009 by Steve Tierney.

Who Ya’ Gonna Call?
If you’ve been following the Ghost Passage shenanigans on this blog then there’s no need to read this or this, but if not those posts make a good preamble to this one.  This afternoon I attended a meeting which had managed to morph from the original small nucleus into a something more like a public gathering (there were more people there than there were at the last police panel meeting I attended…)  The purpose of the meeting was to clarify positions on all sides of the debate and try to agree some way forward.

The meeting was chaired very ably by Cllr. Simon King and featured Myself and Val Bolem (on behalf of the residents), Sgt. David Bax and two PCSOs (on behalf of the Police) and representatives from the Freemasons and The Spiritualist Church (which both adjoin the alley.) 

Now those who have read this blog will know I have not been a big fan of the whole idea of closure.  When I first shot off a couple of emails about it I suspected this might be a lonely position to take.  ‘Turns out that wasn’t the case.  In fact, almost everybody was opposed to the police plan - albeit to different degrees.

I wont go into the detail of what was quite a long meeting.  I found it very interesting but I strongly suspect the old adage “you had to be there” holds true for this and I have no wish to bore readers to sleep. Suffice to say the “compromise plan” involving only two gates did indeed meet with the approval of pretty much everyone.  The police position is that this was always the plan and that the idea of three gates was only put out there to “encourage discussion.”  Indeed.  Well - if that is the case then I’d say they achieved their goals.

I still stand by my original contention that the way to deal with trouble is not to wall it off and pretend it isn’t there.  But it was clear that the “people on the ground” including the two eloquent PCSOs were earnest in their belief that some closure was needed.  I think it would be incredibly arrogant to hold on to my ideological position with an iron grip while ignoring the people at the business end of the problems.   The compromise retains the passage as a public right of way while taking the pressure off the police and, more importantly, the residents who have been most harmed by the antisocial behaviour.

I did manage to get the police to make some important statements which went a long way towards allaying the concerns of many residents.  For the record, Sgt. David Bax committed to the following:-

a. There is no plan to keep the alley closed any longer than 3-6 months. 
b. There is no plan to close the oft-used passage between the Crescent and Love Lane.
c. There are no “other targets” in the form of alleys elsewhere in town to get the same treatment.

With these statements made I can support the new plan and believe that the other residents who protested will agree (although I will, of course, take the time to ask them.  Just to make sure.)

What started out as a worrying development which did nothing to enhance the reputation of the local police has turned out to do quite the opposite.  I cannot fault the way the police have responded to the issues we have raised.  Sgt. Dave Bax was exemplary in his engagement with us.  He was frank, fair and confident.  The PCSOs were a credit to the force too.  Residents were forthright and involved at all levels.  Meanwhile, Cllr King, who had initially been a little difficult on this issue was a vital ingredient in its resolution.  In short, all the cogs in the wheel worked just as they should and everybody came out of it looking reasonable and fair.  A breath of fresh air, all in all.

I suspect that for the time being that’s the end of the tale in regards this particular haunted corner of Wisbech.  The issue of Ghost Passage is hopefully now well and truly exorcised.  So next time there’s something strange in your neighbourhood, who ya’ gonna call?

Pandemonium
As far as I can see there are several schools of thought on the Swine Flu Pandemic. 

There’s the: “I’m not scared of a glorified cold - In fact I’m going to a swine flu party to try to catch it.” 
This is all very well until you discover you’ve got some lurking underlying health condition.

There’s the paranoid: ” The Government / The Press / The Freemasons / The Twilight Zone (Circle One) are out to get us - government made this disease in a test tube” brigade who probably shouldn’t be allowed to play with sharp things.

There are people like my wife who are relaxed and quite fatalistic about it.  “We’re all going to get it sooner or later.   No point worrying about what you can’t prevent.”  (Very wise, my wife.  I should listen.)

And then there’s people like me, who don’t have a clue how bad it is, how bad it might get or what the consequences might be - and who find that lack of control over events nerve-wracking (primarily for our family’s sake.) 

The doctors are keen to tell us not to worry. “It’s no worse than seasonal flu” they say, “people die of that every year.” 
Yes, that’s true.  But we don’t see the government planning to ship in enough vaccine to cover the whole population at Christmas each year, do we?  When you treat something differently, people wonder what is different about it.  I suspect the doctors are quite right, but they really need to start sending their message more clearly.  A climate of fear is not a healthy climate to live in.  We aren’t there yet, but if the predicated 100,000 cases a day reaches fruition I suspect we may see a polarisation of public opinion.

Now I suspect that we’ll get through this just fine.  That many of us will get it, lay in bed for a few days, then get on with our lives.  But the press have done a good job of making people nervous on this one.  Or maybe its more than the press.  I’m not suggesting that we’re in Stephen King’s The Stand here.  There’s no need for a soundtrack of Blue Oyster Cult’s Don’t Fear The Reaper to rattle ominously in the background.  But we should pay attention to the progression of events.  This is a pandemic, after all and the virus itself is very new - almost unique - in its structure.  The way to keep people safe is to be vigilant - not complacent.  And please - if somebody invites you to a swine flu party, tell them where to get off.  Whatever else it is, this isn’t a game.

The Figures (according to Department of Health via The Times newspaper on 3rd July)

7,447 cases of H1N1 swine flu confirmed in Britain so far. Three 29 (update:16th July)  people infected with the virus have died
100,000 new cases predicted each day by the end of August
35 per cent of the population may become ill at the peak of the pandemic
£800m cost of antiviral drugs stockpiled to treat 80 per cent of the population
£155m cost of contracts for vaccines for the pandemic flu strain over four years
12,000 deaths annually due to seasonal flu, likely to be far exceeded in a pandemic

More Blue Please
I spent this evening in Ramsey campaigning on behalf of the Conservative candidates for District and County.  I was pleased to find that our vote seems to be holding up well, that our pledges remain secure and that the people of the area seem to know the colour they want to paint their politics.  I didn’t see much yellow on that canvas tonight. And not a drop of red.

Mostly, the opposition appears to be UKIP (very much as it was for my own campaign recently.)  Interestingly, the results of our canvassing seem to suggest that (for once) the UKIP vote is coming from the Lib Dem camp.  Everywhere I go people seem to be expressing their feelings for the European Union (and they aren’t feelings of love.)  I wouldn’t want to be canvassing on behalf of a pro-European party in this environment!

For the County election on July 23 our Conservative candidate is Susan Normington, a very nice local lady with bags of experience and dedication to spare.  Labour, The Lib Dems and UKIP are all fielding candidates. 

For the District election on the same day the Conservative is Angela Curtis, facing opposition in the form of the Lib Dems, UKIP and an Independent Candidate.

Now I know the people of Cambridgeshire have already blessed the county with that gorgeous blue in a very healthy majority and I have no right to ask any more of you, but I will anyway.  You have two excellent candidates in Susan and Angela.  Tick the right box.  More Blue Please. 
  

Posted in Ramsey, Swine Flu, Ghost Passage, Cambs. County Council, Wisbech | No Comments »

03/07/2009 by Steve Tierney.

Note: Sections of this blog post were updated with new information on 6th July 2009 and where there have been changes they are marked (Update)

Note: A second update has taken place on 10th July 2009 following an email from Val Bolem.  My records have been adjusted accordingly.

Ghost Passage Revisited

Before I start: Can I once again stress that I am not the County Councillor for the division in which Ghost Passage resides (Cllr Simon King is) and so this post is written as a resident and business owner and not in my capacity as a councillor.  Can I also say that I respect the opinions of those on the other side of this debate and that my comments are made because in this instance I do not share those opinions and feel obliged to speak out for myself and the many other residents who apparently feel the same way.

Since I last posted about Ghost Passage and the police plan to close it there have been some developments in the matter.  Since the previous posts elicited several comments and a whole bunch of emails I thought it was worth writing a brief update on where we are now. 

As some readers will know I hand-delivered letters to all the local residents to research their actual opinions rather than just presuming the police view of the matter was correct.  I’m glad I did.  Of the people who have responded so far not a single one has been in favour of the police plan exactly as stated.  Most have been against the plan completely.  Two have been for the plan in a limited form - but against full closure. Not a single person who has responded liked the proposals by the police as they currently stand 

Here is a sample of some of the pertinent comments received:

John Anker emailed a lengthy letter to tell me he opposed the plan.  An extract of the email included: “I do not agree with the closure of Ghost Passage and consider that the consultation is based on a few ‘’special constables’’ or the like talking to a few people. If we are to have a consultation let’s have an open meeting to discuss the matter at a pre-arranged date!!” 

Cllr Michael Hill confirmed to me in person at the mayor’s function today in St. Peter’s Church that he was opposed to the idea of closing Ghost Passage and asked to be kept in the loop so that he could contribute to the discussions.

Janet Stott said that she had signed up to the original idea (the first person who had even heard about it during the much-vaunted ‘consultation’) but that the final plan bore significant differences to the original suggestions - and that she did not support the current plan for complete closure.

Juliet Cairns also emailed me in support of my position saying: “Thanks for your letter regarding the closure of Ghost Passage.  I am in complete agreement with you that the passage should remain open.  I certainly have not received any communication about this so they cannot state that everyone has been consulted. So if they are going to close the passage, won’t that lead to an area which is perfect for the actual activities like drinking, drug taking etc,which they want to stop.  What we actually need is more of a police presence just walking through and actually doing something about the problem, not just shutting it off, so no one can see it, because it certainly won’t stop it. I use the passage daily.  It is needed for the car park at the rear and for access into the town.  There are always little ‘hotspots’ like this in every town, but shutting the passage is not the answer.”

Rupert Wilkes is one of the people who supports the plan in a limited form, but not the plan as outlined by the police.  He said: “If you are right that the police’s draft closure order means that the passage is closed in its entirety, this appears to us unacceptable.  The direct route from under 7 The Crescent to Love Lane is an important pedestrian thoroughfare.  Closing it leaves inbound foot traffic either to pass along Love Lane to the Museum (equally unpoliceable and detrimental to the former almshouses) or to walk against the traffic, with virtually no pavement, up Post Office Lane.  Conversely the path behind the Masonic Hall and your property, which ends up in York Row, does not strike us as too significant a route.  Going via the front of The Crescent and York Row is no major detour.”

Cllr Jonathan Farmer (who has been very supportive and helpful on this matter and whose ideas form most of our alternative proposal) is completely opposed to the police plan saying: “I could not agree with you more. This is a classic example of a consultation being highly selective in who it consults to verify the pre-conceived judgement already decided at.”  His lengthy email went into some detail as to his considered objection to the present plan. 

Cllr Simon King seems a little isolated right now but remains supportive of the original idea: “The police have put in a huge amount of work to try to improve the Ghost Passage area but because of the layout of the alleys it has proved impossible to achieve this other than by gating.  All those who have access onto the alleys were consulted and were very enthusiastic about the proposals, as, indeed, am I.”

(Update) Philip Stokes was one of the minority who supported closure but with the following comment: “You somewhat miss the point when you suggest that we all love the idea of closing Ghost Passage. Ideally it would be far better if it was policed properly. But like the rest of Wisbech this is not going to happen. Alternatively they could put CCTV cameras there – too costly so I’ve found out, so that’s not going to happen either. This leaves what?”

(Update) Jane Coates seems to agree with the compromise plan saying: “I agree that it’s sad to lose the character of Wisbech in the process. Is there a half way solution in gating between A and B on the map hence allowing usage of the passage from Love Lane to the Crescent? Also why couldn’t security cameras be sited in the passage? Just a couple of thoughts and a bit of support.”

(Update) Jeff & Robi Harper sent a brief text saying:  Sorry 4 delay in reply 2 letter re ghost passage , we both agree with your reasons not to close.

Apparently there is a local resident with whom I have not yet spoken who is very taken with the plan.  Luckily, I am at a function on Sunday where I will be sitting at the same table as this individual, which will give me a chance to discuss it over a nice meal (always a good way to get to the heart of things, I find!)
(SECOND Update) The mystery person was Val Bolam with whom I had an interesting chat on Sunday.  Val felt that the police had misrepresented the original idea and agreed that partial closure as per our compromise suggestion was more in keeping with the original plan - and preferable.  Val has emailed me to say that he does not, in fact, feel the police have misrepresented him and has asked me to remove that statement.  Although the original idea was (according to other residents, at least) only two gates and the final plan was for three, Val does not agree with my view of this or feel that any misrepresentation has taken place.  I appreciate Val taking the time to correct me on this and apologise if I misunderstood his original comments to me.

A Way Forward:
Having discussed all this (at length) with most of the local residents now there seems to be a concensus position becoming clear.  A compromise which is acceptable to most of us and is more in keeping with the original idea that the few people who were consulted on this were “sold” in the first place and less like the blanket ban the police seem to have decided will make their life easier.

The current police plan involves three gates which will prevent access to most of the alley and close down the important route from The Crescent to Love Lane.  Our amended proposal would involve only two gates, one at the location the police call “Gate A” exactly as per their plan.  The other on the same length of alley just after the entrance to the Masonic Lodge. 

The effect of this would be to cut off the section of Ghost Passage which is unlit, known to be a “problem area” and which residents frequently complain about, while leaving the well-lit main pedestrian route from The Cresent to Love Lane accessible by all.  This would mean the most attractive and historic section of the alley would be open, but the more standard ‘back alley’ section, which is also seldom used by pedestrians, would be closed except for residents.  This would preserve the right of way for people using the St Raphael centre, the Car Park and the Masonic Lodge without hindrance.  All in all, as compromises go, this seems pretty much perfect.  Every resident I have spoken to agrees this is an excellent way to address the concerns on both sides of the argument. 

But will the police and the Powers That Be go for it?  I suppose that depends on whether they are open-minded enough to accept they misjudged this a bit and are flexible enough to adjust their plans to suit the residents and users of the passage.  I’ll be having a meeting next week (accompanied by Cllr. Jonathan Farmer) to argue the case and then we’ll see!

Posted in Ghost Passage, Wisbech | No Comments »

29/06/2009 by Steve Tierney.

Not A Ghost Of A Chance
I received a letter recently from Cambridgeshire Police.  Apparently they want to close Ghost Passage for “3 months, possibly 6 months”.  Since I am a resident adjacent to the alleyway they’ve written to me to “confirm I have been consulted.”

I haven’t been consulted. 

Unless this letter confirming I have been is supposed to actually be the consultation - which would be a pretty sad state of affairs I think.

Before I proceed I should stress that I write this blog entry as a private citizen, not with my County Council hat on.  My division does not actually include the area in which I live (missing it by about 200 yds, but that’s neither here nor there.)  So I’m writing as a resident and property owner on this issue.

For those who do not live nearby: Ghost Passage is an alleyway with three entrances that winds and twists it’s way along the back of The Crescent and Alexandra Road in Wisbech.  It’s also known as “Gunson’s Passage” and is something of a historic little path, in its own quiet way.

The police state their reasons for wanting to close the alleyway (by erecting fences blocking all the entrances).  These are; Graffiti Removal, Needle Removal & Prevention of Antisocial Behaviour.

I’ve seen graffiti removal being done a few times.  It doesn’t take six months, or even three months and I see no reason why it would cause the alleyway to need to be closed.  Needle Removal takes even less time - and I should add that in the 8 years I’ve been walking along Ghost Alley pretty much every single day I’ve never seen any needles lying around.  Let’s try to keep this in perspective.  Perhaps there have been one or two - a sign of the times - but it’s not like the alleyway is littered with them and I’ve never encountered any at all.

Which leads me to the sad conclusion that the real reason for closure is antisocial behaviour.  Yes, groups of youths do hang around in the alley at times.  Yes there is some vandalism and some antisocial behaviour on occasion.  But is this really how we deal with the occasional problem people now - close the area to the public? 

Quite frankly, I see a lot more antisocial behaviour going on outside the Angles Theatre beside me than I ever hear from the alley behind me.  So does that mean we close Alexandra Road?  Of course not.  The nearby churchyard is always host to groups of drunk leery visitors to Britain, but that remains joyfully open to all.  Are we really at the point where our solution is to put up fences and close up shop?  God forbid the police might actually patrol once in a while to encourage order - oh no, let’s just build a barrier and sweep the problem under the carpet.

Why do I even care?  It’s only an alley, right?  Well first - I rather like that alley.  I walk my dogs through it every night and have done since I moved to Wisbech eight years ago.  But even before I moved here, when I was just visiting the town, I used it.  I found it’s winding route and quaint meandering brick-lined passages charming back then and I still do.  It’s mostly peaceful and it’s pleasantly old-fashioned.   But more importantly I really don’t like this idea of just surrendering.  Of seeing a problem and instead of trying to solve it - just walling it up and pretending it isn’t there.  I don’t like to be bullied away from places I enjoy by a tiny minority of difficult social elements.

It may be that my fellow residents want the alleyway closed.  It certainly is easier to throw up your hands and accept any solution that’ll move trouble on from your doorstep.  But I hope that’s not the case.  I hope they agree that there are other - better - ways of dealing with this than closure.

Cambridgeshire Police say this is for 3 months, maybe 6 months.  That’s too long.  But I worry that what they really mean is forever and this is the quiet way of getting the ball rolling.  Maybe nobody cares, but I think that would be a sad day indeed.

Cambridgeshire Police want me to fill in a form saying I “consent” to the closure.  Well I don’t.  Will that make any difference?  I doubt it.  But I wanted to say it anyway.

Update 30th June 2009: 

After further discussions and a flurry of emails brought on by my blog and my comments thus far, the Powers That Be assure me “everybody but me” is in favour of this.  I just can’t believe that.  I’ve decided to find out and have posted letters to all the residences in Alexandra Road, The Crescent and Ghost Passage asking for their views.  Comments on this blog and responses received thus far seem to suggest the Powers That Be are talking from their posterior.  But we’ll see when a few more comments come in.  On my side of the fence - Town and District Cllr Jonathan Farmer seems to agree (and suggests most of the Town Council do too.) 

On the other side of the debate - Councillor Kit Owen, while not expressing an opinion directly, suggested I was “point scoring” (whatever that means).  I’m not point scoring, I’m just speaking up for what I believe.  Isn’t that what we expect one another to do in a civilised democracy?  County Cllr. Simon King does not share my view on this, saying plainly he “supports the closure”.  I have a great deal of respect for Simon King, but I simply cannot see how the solution to an antisocial behaviour problem in a public right of way is to put up barriers to the public.  This is not Northern Ireland during the troubles.  This is Wisbech.  So in this instance I am afraid I have to respectfully disagree with the view of my friend and colleagues.

I plan to meet Insp Sissons next week with whatever evidence I have managed to gather and state the case against closure.  If any readers of my blog agree with me, please take the time to email me on me@stevetierney.org, text or phone me on 07831 616127, or write to me at Steve Tierney, 6 Alexandra Road., Wisbech PE13 1HQ.  The more comments I receive the better case I will have when I meet the police.

I must again stress that it may turn out that the majority of my neighbours think this is a great idea.  If that turns out to be the case then I will be disappointed, but I will pursue this no further.  Democracy is democracy.  I don’t enjoy causing a stink just for the sake of it.  I just feel obliged to show there is another side to the argument.  I hope that seems reasonable.

Posted in Ghost Passage, Wisbech | 5 Comments »