It will certainly be interesting to see how he votes....
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh
"Jim Orr quits SNP over ‘internal spats’ "
(70 posts)-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
I just don't buy this idea that he wasn't high profile enough. I follow education issues pretty closely and I had no idea that David key was deputy convenor of education until it was mentioned at a community council meeting.
To me it looks as though it was the other way around and that he was too good at getting Into the papers - and using social media/ the edinburgh reporter effectively to push his agenda.
Which ties in with suggestions that there were internal party friction (easy to believe) and/or ambitious people (possibly with links higher up in party) who want his spot.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"possibly with links higher up in party"
You mean closeness to Keith Brown wasn't enough to save him...
Posted 10 years ago # -
I am sorry that Cllr Orr resigned, despite everything he was doing a reasonable job (with the usual caveats).
When his successor is eventually announced, we'll get a better understanding of the direction in which SNP priorities are heading at local level.
To me it looks as though it was the other way around and that he was too good at getting Into the papers
Hence the "cycling evangelist" label and the suggestion that he was apparently too keen on sustainability (?) and also that he had not "won the argument" (which begs the question: with whom?)...
Perhaps others in the SNP group felt Cllr Orr's position was not 'distinctive' enough ie. not similar enough to their own, too similar to Labour's/the Greens'? That is, he did not give enough profile to their concerns - which are? I'm sure we'll find out soon enough!
The Greens weren't needed for a majority.
Indeed, so what were they needed for? A fig leaf?
I fully accept that I was not part of (or party to) the (inevitably difficult) negotiations.
Neither was I. I read the statement of the Green group after negotiations came to an end. The Green Cllrs considered the options and decided it was best not to join a coalition where they could be easily outflanked or ignored by other parties (which appeared to be a reference to the SNP). They chose instead constructive opposition and holding the coalition to account. Which is entirely reasonable.
Arguably a Labour/SNP coalition is what most people voted for.
"We" have been lucky so far to have a cycling friendly individual in the transport (and environment) vice-convener's post (whatever the compromises of his position on certain issues). It will be almost unbelievably lucky if that happens again. Personally I doubt it will. I hope I am wrong and there'll be a pleasant surprise for all those looking to see cycling and active travel generally given more attention in Council policy. What are the chances though?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Interesting how now we all seem to be giving councillors and council policy more credit for pro-cycling policy than we ever did before.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@ SRD
Not sure what you mean.
'The Council' has policies.
Some are because individual councillors have pushed for them.
Some because (generally following political direction - often after 'external pressure') officials produce reports recommending things. These can then be approved by committee(s)/full council.
Sometimes that is enough and officials just get on with it.
Often it requires vigilance and the commitment of councillors and outsiders.
I think this thread is about the 'fear' that 'new eyes' may be on different balls...
Posted 10 years ago # -
What this emphasises (yet again) is that 'the council' is not the unified entity which it is often seen as. Rather it is a collection of individuals and groups working to push the causes that they see as most important. This applies also to officials, not just councillors. Recognising this is very important in lobbying - it is vital to support 'friends' in their internal battles within the council, in order to try and strengthen their position.
Over the last year or so JO has been constantly repeating verbally and in documents how important it is that cycling interests give positive feedback. He was not asking for uncritical support but for criticism to be constructive rather than negative, and to be accompanied by a clear recognition of what is good.
It seemed likely at the time, and with hindsight it seems pretty certain, that his repeated pleas reflected these internal battles. If his colleagues see little in the press and in social media except negative comment, then they are unlikely to think he is doing a good job in political terms, and to help them get re-elected, so his internal position is weakened.
Things are far from perfect in cycling policy in Edinburgh, but they are much better than most (or probably all) other Scottish Councils and it is really important to see the negative aspects in that context. This is what we try to do in the spokes bulletin - the new issue is a good example - ironic that it should come out just at this moment.
Experience in the past has shown that the individual in charge of cycling policy can make a big difference - often a bigger difference than their party's official policies. The present 'good' phase in council policy began when Cllr Mackenzie (LibDem) took over from Cllr Wheeler (also LibDem; i.e. same policies but different person) and continued after the elections when Cllr Orr took over.
We are now definitely in for a bit of uncertainty until we see not just who is the new person, but even more important how they act in this post. We will be lucky if they show as much commitment to the role of cycling as was shown by Cllr Mackenzie and Cllr Orr.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"He was not asking for uncritical support but for criticism to be constructive rather than negative, and to be accompanied by a clear recognition of what is good."
The problem there is that some people choose to believe that any criticism is negative.
The (potential) improvements on Leith Walk are largely due to a lot of criticism AND positive suggestions on how the plans could be improved.
Curiously JO thought the original proposals were 'ok' and that campaigning for better was a waste of time. To his credit he then changed his mind and helped get £3m from SG.
Just because Edinburgh is a lot better than most councils doesn't mean that enough of what it does is "good".
QBiC is not good. Parts are better than before, and (I think) more people are using it - so that much is good.
Even after Andrew Burns criticised various elements in his blog nothing changed. The only(?) changes on the cards are to reduce restrictions on parking!
Chips instead of red surfacing is not good - nothing seems to change there in spite of the efforts of Cllrs Burns and Orr and Spokes.
Things ARE improving - more money to be spent, there's current consultation on the Innocent to Canal route. When that is finished properly, the 'family network' might begin to get some credibility.
(Don't mention Haymarket or the trams...)
In short the Cycle Team is doing a great job within a council, parts of which, don't care/see the point.
So (in my opinion) praising the good leaves plenty of room for pointing out the less than good (we're not expecting perfection here) and expecting/asking for more.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I agree with both chdot and DdF, with the added caveat that it was often hard to know who to be positive to.
When there were positive things I made an effort to highlight them. But my councillors pretty much onside. Seems to me that we needed people in say duddingston, cramond, etc to send positive messages to their councillors. But how to arrange that?
Posted 10 years ago # -
@chdot
I read from DdF's post that Jim Orr was seeking positive feedback because he was holding a line against criticism from less cycling friendly members of the SNP
I think the council needs to keep improving, the tram related link from jenners depository to Stenhouse path is nice bit of infrastructure, other bodies also playing their part on my commute such as Heriot watt finally resurfacing the west entrance, landing lights on towpath too.
Not sure until we see who replaces Jim Orr if momentum will continue.
As you say the cycling team of council employees are doing a good job but we need politicians to be pro-cycling too.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"I read from DdF's post that Jim Orr was seeking positive feedback because he was holding a line against criticism from less cycling friendly members of the SNP"
Yes and no doubt some were saying 'what's the point of doing anything? - 'cyclists' are so ungrateful'.
Whether JO resigned because he was fed up "holding a line" or his party was fed up with him "holding a line" is not clear.
Either way I don't think it's up to people wanting things to be better in Edinburgh to second-guess the secret feelings of a small number of politicians.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Agreed, it would not be possible for us as mere voters to protect a vulnerable politician from his/her colleagues.
We just need to be very supportive of pro cycling initiatives?
Posted 10 years ago # -
"We just need to be very supportive of pro cycling initiatives?"
In principle yes.
In practice yes, when they are good.
One problem is that some stuff is good, some is not - there is still no consistent, joined-up, way of doing things by CEC - in spite of all its active travel policies (approved by politicians including JO's former party colleagues).
Perhaps the PoP ride should pause at the City Chambers on its way to Holyrood.
Posted 10 years ago # -
It is certainly not right to say things are good if they are not, but there are ways of doing things. .
e.g. on QBIC at one extreme one can say the whole thing is rubbish, saying or implying that the people implementing it are stupid rather than recognising that they are under heavy opposite pressures from traders, some councillors, etc.
Alternatively you can point out its flaws and the reasons behind its excessive cost in a constructive way and recognise that for all its faults it is an improvement on the previous situation. [Although some people do think it is total rubbish and likely to increase crashes that has always been a minority view, going by the only survey we know of]
And whilst undoubtedly some schemes leave a lot to be desired, they need to be criticised in the context that Edinburgh's overall policies are raising cycle use, raising walking, raising bus use, and cutting car commuting - as shown by the census results. Those achievements are all the more impressive because the picture in Scotland as a whole has been going the other way.
I am certainly not saying we shouldn't criticise the bad - but it should be done in a constructive way, also understanding that people in the council are not stupid, but are under strong pressures from many directions; and that the overall council policy direction is working.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"it should be done in a constructive way"
Agreed.
Andrew Burns did that about QBiC - and nothing changed.
"are under strong pressures from many directions;"
Clearly, and to some degree it's surprising how much has been/is being achieved for 'active travel'.
A LOT of credit goes to Spokes - and the consistency over many years.
That all started in the "over my dead body" days of simply campaigning for cycling on MMW.
After that a lot of great work was done by Lothian Region (some officials are still in place...)
"and that the overall council policy direction is working"
Perhaps.
But this is the 'real problem'. The campaigning (in Edinburgh ) has worked. The policies are in place - however (it sometimes seems) those (politicians and officials) who oppose/are sceptical about 'the agenda' ignore/undermine/block where they can.
They hide behind 'planning legislation'/'what the traders want' etc.
Politicians - scared of the voters/Evening News/colleagues hold back from promoting a strong vision of less traffic, better conditions for pedestrians (AND businesses) and preside over a mix of good, bad and indifferent.
I'm sure there are people who think PoP is 'a bit over the top', 'unrealistic' and should 'praise the good and ask (privately) for a bit more'.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"Andrew Burns did this (constructive criticism)and nothing changed"
Yes it did!
They agreed to do things better in Leith Walk and went to the government and secured the funding to do so. Leith Walk still won't be perfect, but the top half will be segregated and the onroad lanes in the bottom half will be significantly better than QBIC - wider and with a buffer zone next to the car doors. They are also in the early stages of thinking about the east-west city centre route from West Ed to Leith Walk, in which they say that some sections will be segregated, with the others still under consideration - as in the recent Ev News 'scoop.'
A few years ago, plans for these schemes would have been much more modest.
It is true that QBiC itself has not been changed as yet, but change tends to come by learning from the past in the next lot of schemes not by continually rebuilding the same scheme [unless of course if it worsens a situation, i.e. causes crashes that were not happening before]. Of course QBiC will get its turn again in the future at some point, but hopefully that will not be until such time as councillors have more confidence in restricting car parking and reallocating roadspace. The above schemes, and continuing lobbying by individuals and groups, should move them further along that road.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"Yes it did!"
I was just referring to QBiC.
I accept what you say about 'its time will come' and 'future political bravery', but the fact remains the 'simple cycling punter' will see it as half-hearted, half-finished with terrible surfaces in a couple of places ('not part of the QBiC spec' - WHY NOT??), 'missing' lanes, inadequate notification of the 20mph and poor parking enforcement. (Some details by Spokes - think most are still unfixed. )
It's ironic that the day Andrew Burns rode from KB with CCE people that the wardens were out - after complaints...
That first hand experience should have been enough to make something happen on the QBiC (in my opinion).
Posted 10 years ago # -
"
Out now! … Edinburgh progress in sustainable transport; Preventing Haymarket tramline crashes; Transport & Planning: failure in joined-up thinking; Council Local Transport Strategy supplement; Everyday bike use pictures; and loads more…
"
http://www.spokes.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/pall6.pdf
Posted 10 years ago # -
Two sources have told me -
'
Vice-Convener will be SNP.Division of responsibilities is a matter for negotiation, post appointment.
'
So Lesley Hinds could (for instance) chair Cycle Forum as well as Transport Forum and Access Forum.
Alternatively all could be chaired by her new deputy!
We shall see.
I don't think there is any chance of any attempt to alter existing policies - or dilute or delay their implementation.
A quick look at the reports for the last T&I committee shows that there is much more to it than 'active travel', so the new V-C could be made responsible for other things.
http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/meetings/meeting/3190/transport_and_environment_committee
Posted 10 years ago # -
Vice-Convener will be SNP.
Division of responsibilities is a matter for negotiation, post appointment.
Yep. Pretty much what we've been divining here.
Posted 10 years ago # -
SNP group meets tonight to decide replacement.
It will be one of these -
http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/councillors/specificParty/14/snp_group
Though some won't want the job as they already are convenors - unless there is a major reshuffle.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Posted 10 years ago #
-
I would disagree with DdF above: Edinburgh does not have the most enlightened cycle policy in Scotland. I;d say you need to look to Dundee for that. OK The policy is not so cycle specific, but they have created a traffic free town centre, with good quality public realm, where public transport and cycling and walking are given proper priority over private cars. They had a policy of including cycle storage in new residential developments (and this is proper cycle storage) for many years now- the first in Scotland to achieve such a policy. They put together the 'green circular' when Edinburgh were just talking about sorting out the NEN; the facility to get onto the tay bridge is second to none, as is the treatment for cycle passage through the docks at a time when this passage was going to be banned completely because of the fear of terrorist attack; and the off road route from Dundee centre to Broughty Ferry had guiding fluorescent dots a long time before the canal towpath was given its makeover. So I don;t actually think Edinburgh DOES have the accolade of being the place thats best for cyclists nor that should have the accolade for the best policy. Unfortunately however, Dundee seriously lets itself down by not including cycle facilities in the well publicised Water Front regeneration. A very short sighted decision by a visionary who was brought in from Glasgow to progress the project, which in all other respects is actually very forward thinking (though over time has been slightly altered to water down some of the very good stuff).
I really recommend a site visit to Dundee for all cycle campaigners just now. Its not just about the specific cycle-related policy that counts: its the overall policy about transport and how to manage road space and the street environment which embodies ideas that facilitates cycling and walking. And at the moment, Dundee is doing that FAR better than Edinburgh.Finally is it true that cllr Adam McVey is to be the convenor of the cycle forum now?
Lizzie.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@ L
Interesting!
Must go and look again.
Agree about the 'green circular' - was a good product of the SOCC.
http://www.spokes.org.uk/oldsite/srdundee.htm
If I remember rightly, key council official moved to non-cycle related work.
Don't think actual numbers of people cycling increased much.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"Finally is it true that cllr Adam McVey is to be the convenor of the cycle forum now?"
Not yet.
Up to negotiations between him and Lesley Hinds.
Don't know if he wants to, but has now 'come out' as bike rider -
"
Adam McVey (@adamrmcvey)
14/03/2014 18:47
@CyclingEdin @DrCarolineBrown @POPScotland @Edinburgh_CC I'll be on my bike, hoping for sunshine!"
Posted 10 years ago # -
Well the SOCC was a small part of the overall Green Circular project.
The cycle officer per-ce was not the most focussed (sorry to say that) - their Access Officer was far more motivating and brought many great changes - she now works in Fife, but these achievements were made because of an overall council commitment. The Dundee Path Challenge (2003) (a focussed attempt to get various community groups in Dundee to propose projects for active travel improvements) was a great motivator: it brought drawdown not only for the improvements to NCN1 to Broughty Ferry (inc the flourescent guiding dots) but also a lot of the town centre public realm improvements.
Dundee really is worth a visit.
Lizzie.Posted 10 years ago # -
Posted 10 years ago #
-
its the lift that counts the most (don;t know how to load an image). But its big enough for tandems and/or trailers and has auto doors so no difficulties. Takes you up to the bridge cycle/walk way. Hassle free. It really is the TOPS facility.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Can't find my lift pic.
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
