Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

MP claims there is ‘overwhelming opposition’ to Enfield's Mini Holland

Councillor questions how the survey was carried out

Enfield Southgate MP David Burrowes has asked local residents for their views on proposed segregated cycle lanes along the A105 from Palmers Green to Enfield Town. He says that 75 per cent of those asked are against the Cycle Enfield project.

This is Local London reports that Burrowes wants the £30m Mini Holland grant to be given back to the mayor, arguing the work will “decimate” street parking among other things. “It will result in increased congestion, worsened bus services and further blight on the high street as businesses struggle to survive,” he said.

Enfield "Mini Holland" cycling plans revealed

In December, Burrowes sent out 17,000 freepost postcards asking local households: “Do you support the overall proposals for the A105 Cycle Lanes scheme?” Of these, 2,828 were completed and returned. 462 (17.71%) said they were in favour of the scheme; 1,973 (75.62%) said they were against it; 155 (5.94%) partially supported it; and 13 (0.5%) said they didn’t know.

Enfield Council’s consultation got 1,646 responses. In contrast, it found that 60 per cent of respondents were in favour – 51 per cent fully and nine per cent in part – with 39 per cent against.

Announcing the results at the time, Councillor Daniel Anderson, the Council’s Cabinet Member for Environment, said: “The silent majority have spoken – and shown they actually like our plans – despite a vocal campaign which has been spreading disinformation about what the proposals would actually mean for Palmers Green.”

Anderson was also unimpressed with how Burrowes’ survey had been carried out. “It was completely muddled and people will have been unclear about what it was really about, as he was not proposing any changes but rather asking for an opinion. He has wasted time and tax payers’ money,” he said.

Nevertheless, Burrowes will this week meet with the Mayor of London to discuss the results.

“I will be meeting with Boris this week and will be telling him that the majority of my constituents need to be listened to. This significant scheme needs broad support from residents and businesses and it is clear that the Council has not got it. 75 per cent of my constituents have said no to Cycle Enfield along the A105. The numbers opposing the plan greatly exceed the total number that responded to the Council's consultation.”

Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.

Add new comment

26 comments

Avatar
Ush | 8 years ago
1 like

This looks like fairly decent infrastructure. 

Avatar
adrianwebb | 8 years ago
0 likes

I live off  Winchmore Hill Broadway in a village style community which I like, I walk around do som shopping chat to local traders and so on.

I really and seldom see any cyclists on the road , where are all these cyclists that need our whole community turned upside down to give special super highways  for...its just nonsense.

I was speaking to our local bike shop , he struggles to sell bikes and is considering closing up such is the lack of demand .....where are the cyclists ?

Lets see some sense and kick this scheme into touch and spend the £40million on something that we can all benefit from...perhaps a rate reduction ? or the pavements repaired ?

 

Avatar
kie7077 replied to adrianwebb | 8 years ago
2 likes
adrianwebb wrote:

I live off  Winchmore Hill Broadway in a village style community which I like, I walk around do som shopping chat to local traders and so on.

I really and seldom see any cyclists on the road , where are all these cyclists that need our whole community turned upside down to give special super highways  for...its just nonsense.

I was speaking to our local bike shop , he struggles to sell bikes and is considering closing up such is the lack of demand .....where are the cyclists ?

Lets see some sense and kick this scheme into touch and spend the £40million on something that we can all benefit from...perhaps a rate reduction ? or the pavements repaired ?

Quite simply there are no cyclists because cycling on Green lanes and in Enfield and is not for the light hearted, you can expect to be passed dangerously close every time, and on occasions tailgated, revved at and beeped at just for cycling on the road. There are many places where cars are parked leaving only one lane and drivers don't like it when cyclists use that lane. And these stupid drivers don't want infrastructure to be put in which would mean they don't get held up by those cyclists, thick as planks.

I live on one of the roads about to be upgraded, I'm not looking forwards to the construction which will no doubt last for many months but it'll be worth it. I look forwards to seeing more people cycling and to being able to cycle at a leisurely pace without the constant stress of close passes.

Ps.

I cycle in central London a lot, Enfield is a far worse place to cycle, more parked cars, more door zones, less traffic calming, more speeding drivers, more impatient drivers.

Avatar
bikebot replied to kie7077 | 8 years ago
2 likes
adrianwebb wrote:

Lets see some sense and kick this scheme into touch and spend the £40million on something that we can all benefit from...perhaps a rate reduction ? or the pavements repaired ?

Yes, I can see why the pavements would need to be repaired.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-road-crash-bus-involved-in-...

 

 

Avatar
squired | 8 years ago
3 likes

Never trust locals to comment on such issues.  Near to where I live there were continual complaints about too much traffic affecting local businesses and the constant gridlock making it horrible for shoppers.  So, eventually they built a bypass.  Shortly after it built the same people were complaining that due to the bypass they were losing business because the street was now quieter.  Everyone acts in self interest without actually understanding the potential impact.  That is why you need a supposed impartial body who act in the best interests of the public.  In the case of this plan we only need to look at the recent reports about pollution levels in part of London.  Developments like this are an important part of overcoming those problems.

Avatar
ironmancole | 8 years ago
4 likes

What a cretin.

17000 sent out.

2828 returned. Oddly enough the split of 1973 against, 462 for, 155 partially support and 13 don't knows equals 2603 so where's the remaining 225 cards?!!

Further, only 1973 were that horrified by the proposal that they returned the cards. Most will be lazy sods with little understanding of what is even going in, no doubt pushed a touch by this out of date counsellor presenting a prejudiced view.

The rest who did respond supported or weren't offput by it, even with 225 cards seemingly not accounted for.

So actually in reality 1973 were 'officially' opposed, some 15,027 were so unconcerned by the proposal they didn't actively object.

Propose a power station in that immediate location, send 17000 opinion cards out and most will not only object but will make damn sure their voice is heard!

Conclusion? Congratulations Mr. Burrowes, you've just essentially shown this is actually wanted.  

Avatar
mrchrispy | 8 years ago
2 likes

give them a 4 lane urban clearway...see how much that improves the quality of life.

Avatar
BikeBud | 8 years ago
2 likes

"75 per cent of my constituents have said no to Cycle Enfield along the A105"

No you dipshit, 75% of the people who responded have said no.  

 

Avatar
DaveE128 | 8 years ago
4 likes

I'd love to see what the survey cards actually said. I suspect that this MP has an agenda and wouldn't be surprised if the thing was phrased along the lines of "do you support the proposals to reduce parking in the high street?" Ie playing up the perceived negatives and playing down or omitting the positives.

Avatar
darrylxxx | 8 years ago
3 likes

"The silent majority have spoken" and told you to go back to your man cave and leave the policy decisions to grown ups.

Avatar
bikebot | 8 years ago
2 likes

Just on the ballot...

There's a reason why polling companies use telephone or street interviews. If you use postal returns it becomes largely biased towards those with spare time, the over 60's.

The same of course is usually true of public consultations, which is why those that campaign for cycling make an effort to promote them (with some success in the mini-Hollands).

Avatar
ianrobo replied to bikebot | 8 years ago
2 likes
bikebot wrote:

Just on the ballot...

There's a reason why polling companies use telephone or street interviews. If you use postal returns it becomes largely biased towards those with spare time, the over 60's. 

 

indeed and of course no way of knowing the sample picked is a fair representation either. Easy for the MP to target certain wards with drives of cars eh ? We know that the opposition to cycling in London and in fact the country comes from the surburbs who will never let go of their metal box.

Avatar
ianrobo replied to bikebot | 8 years ago
0 likes
bikebot wrote:

Just on the ballot...

There's a reason why polling companies use telephone or street interviews. If you use postal returns it becomes largely biased towards those with spare time, the over 60's. 

 

indeed and of course no way of knowing the sample picked is a fair representation either. Easy for the MP to target certain wards with drives of cars eh ? We know that the opposition to cycling in London and in fact the country comes from the surburbs who will never let go of their metal box.

Avatar
bikebot | 8 years ago
3 likes

I'm sure many of you will have been watching the livestream of the GLA Transport Committee session yesterday... no?

Anyway, as the public gallery had a small group of objectors from Enfield, Gilligan engaged in a little bit of trolling.  He took a moment to thank them for the publicity which helped attract so much support during the consultation.

A point he repeated several times is that any worthwhile scheme will attract objectors. Conversely of course that would mean if there aren't objections, whatever is being proposed is probably pointless.

Avatar
P3t3 | 8 years ago
3 likes

I hope Boris realises that this (rather ignorant) MP is on a hiding to nothing and tells him to hop it.  We desparately need these demo schemes to work so they can be used as an example in the future.  If they get watered down then the point will not be made well enough.  This is the only way that I can see change being made to solve local air pollution problems.  

If the point isn't made well enough then we can expect our town centres to be just as awful for years to come.  

 

What is it about people that they will campaign tooth and nail against change just for the sake of it?  

Avatar
wycombewheeler | 8 years ago
7 likes

I bet if you carried out a similar poll for parking fines or speeding fines, you would get a similar response. Shall we ban those as well?

 

OR should we just do what is right to improve the lives of everybody, rather than just pandering to entitled drivers?

Avatar
brooksby | 8 years ago
9 likes

There is always such a fuss made, as if on-street parking is the hallmark of true civilisation... It isn't some constitutional right to be able to park on the road.

Anyway, if there's a car park at each end of the street anyway then what's the problem?

Is the MP saying that so many of his constituents are unable to walk even short distances? If so, doesn't he find that worrying?

Avatar
kie7077 | 8 years ago
5 likes

The changes would drag large parts of Enfield out of the drab seventies, the idiots petitioned don't know what's good for them. I expect if the same idiots are asked again in a couple of years they'll back the changes.

These morons don't get that having cycle lanes mean they will be held up less by bikes because of the segrated bike lanes.

0% cycling share, the place needs to change, there's no point petitioning such ignorant people about something they know nothing about.

Avatar
musicalmarc | 8 years ago
4 likes

I'm struggling to understand his complaint.  The nice part of Enfield town centre is the pedestrianised area.  The area on the high street, segragated by two lanes of slow moving traffic is horrible.  Removing the traffic will greatly improve the area and the quality of shops will be better.  The existing car parks are at each end of the high street so I'm not sure why he thinks car parking spaces will be removed, there are only a few parking spaces on the road running through the centre.

Avatar
Argos74 | 8 years ago
11 likes

50.6% of his consituents are against David Burrowes. I presume that he will meet with Mr Cameron in due course to abolish David Burrowes.

 

http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/mr-david-burrowes/1518

Avatar
Dnnnnnn | 8 years ago
10 likes

Who knows what The Truth is here - and should we care? Governments (national and local) aren't only elected to do what's popular - they're supposed to have vision and to lead sometimes. The right thing isn't always the currently popular thing.

Avatar
ianrobo replied to Dnnnnnn | 8 years ago
2 likes
Duncann wrote:

Who knows what The Truth is here - and should we care? Governments (national and local) aren't only elected to do what's popular - they're supposed to have vision and to lead sometimes. The right thing isn't always the currently popular thing.

 

we are moving it seems into politics by twitter and facebook. You are spot on politicans are supposed to lead and influence. If they do this scheme and people really don;t like it then you have the option at the ballot box to vote them out, thats democracy.

Not the sham democracy of free post enevelopes (bet to selected favourable areas with 4 cars) and consultations. 

Avatar
1961BikiE | 8 years ago
4 likes

Less than 17% of those surveyed returned a Freepost response. So 75% of 17% are bothered enough to respond. And to be fair even less were bothered enough to state they were in favour. But he certainly can't honestly claim that 75% of his constituents oppose the scheme. But then I'm sure this goes on all over for all sort of schemes.

Avatar
adrianwebb replied to 1961BikiE | 8 years ago
0 likes

The whole problem with this issue is that a huge amount of cash is being spent on a tiny minority of people , it cannot be fair or reasonable to spend £40 million pounds on a project to benefit 2% of road users .. you guys.

At yesterdays debate at County Hall the mayors representative said that he would be surprised if after ten years of works and investment that cycling would increase due to the investment and ongoing spend of millions to 4% of the road users...how can this be right.

The scheme needs completely re thinking in concept and planning and our pathetic un professional bunch of amateurs in Enfield Council need to get their act together and stop wasting our precious resources on a lost course.

 

1961BikiE wrote:

Less than 17% of those surveyed returned a Freepost response. So 75% of 17% are bothered enough to respond. And to be fair even less were bothered enough to state they were in favour. But he certainly can't honestly claim that 75% of his constituents oppose the scheme. But then I'm sure this goes on all over for all sort of schemes.

Avatar
brooksby replied to adrianwebb | 8 years ago
3 likes
adrianwebb wrote:

The whole problem with this issue is that a huge amount of cash is being spent on a tiny minority of people , it cannot be fair or reasonable to spend £40 million pounds on a project to benefit 2% of road users .. you guys.

 

Well, hello, Mr Troll.   3  I can't believe that we didn't see it before...  I think you are quite right.  And you know what, let's go one step further - all those ramps and things for the disabled?  We can scrap those - I mean, people with wheelchairs or sight problems are only a tiny minority, why should we waste money on them?

Look  - £40m is like about three miles of motorway upgrade, so to be honest I think it's a pretty good deal.

Have you never heard of the concept of "If you build it, they will come"?  It could be that at the moment there aren't so many cyclists because your road environment is a bit c**p...  If the road environment is made safer for everyone (not just safer for the people driving around in their Chelsea Tractors) then maybe, just maybe, all those people who currently drive out of the city so they can ride their bikes around some woodland with their families, will start riding them around *in* the city; you know, in the area they live in...

Avatar
CXR94Di2 | 8 years ago
2 likes

Somebody telling porkies

Latest Comments