Sheffield Council to decide the fate of your ANPR data

[Planner1]

We've all commented on the results and all of us who have posted here have said the result is unsatisfactory. People tell you daily on this forum that the decisions you have made have led to things being done that we do not believe make traffic any better.

We're at a point I think people wait for you to reply and see what patronising answer you'll provide just to tell you again your decision was wrong. I'm we can tell you that the next business decision you make will be wrong.

 

You say "we've" all commented. What that basically adds up to is a few of the usual suspects moaning about the usual subjects. That is fine, but you and the (very) few others who share your views are not the majority on this Forum or in the wider world.

 

In my view SF gives similar results to most consultation / public involvement exercises. Most people have a look at what is being discussed, like to be informed, but don't have a particular view one way or the other. Some people are in favour of what's being proposed and will say so, others are vehemently against and will say so. On the Forum, that equates to threads being viewed perhaps by thousands, but there only being perhaps a hundred posts, by about 20 people.

 

Most things that Local Highway Authorities do are "interventions" and that usually means someone is disadvantaged or annoyed by it. Therefore, invariably, there will be people who complain about what is being proposed. Officers expect that and are happy to explain things and put the case for what is being done (even if they don't personally agree with it). Inevitably, some aren't convinced, which is where the politicians come in. They are accountable at the ballot box, so they take the final decision on whether objections are overruled or upheld. Also, they can, to some extent, steer the Council policies and interventions towards the things that are on their political manifesto.

 

I don't feel that your picture of how much one officer can influence things is realistic. There are teams of people doing each type of activity the Council are involved in. Individual officers are in charge of individual projects (of which there are many), but they are steered by managers and politicians and of course, politicians take the final decisions.

 

It's very difficult to make traffic "better". Opportunities like the new Inner Relief Road project are few and far between. Mostly, these days, it's about managing the growth in traffic and associated worsening of congestion in order to keep things moving as well as possible. That's a country-wide trend and is not particular to Sheffield.

[notplanner]

We really ought to emphasise one point to make it very, very clear, in case people are misled. Planner1 does not work for Sheffield City Council. His views are therefore entirely his own and not always correct and certainly do not reflect the views, opinions or policies of the council.

Edited June 4, 2009 by notplanner
spelling

[Cyclone]

What's the point in engaging in public debate if you can so easily (and glibly) brush it off.

What would it actually take before you took anyone's concerns seriously?

[Planner1]

What's the point in engaging in public debate if you can so easily (and glibly) brush it off.

What would it actually take before you took anyone's concerns seriously?

I'm not "glibly" brushing anything off, I'm explaining the reality of consultation.

 

I was responding to Captain Scarlets point about all the people who had made negative posts about ANPR. In reality that amounts to a handful of people. Out of half a million Sheffielders, that doesn't amount to a tidal wave of public opinion, does it?

 

Of the people who have expressed concerns on here, as far as I'm aware, NOT ONE has contacted the Council directly to express that concern. That gives me an indication of how deep and widely held those concerns are. However, I do actually value public debate and I think there have been valid points made here.

 

In fact, as far as I can see, the only person who's actually done anything practical about progressing the concerns raised here is me! You'll probably say, "that's what we pay you for" and yes, I'll agree. I've done my job and raised those points with the officers concerned and I'm continuing to press them. So no, I haven't "glibly" brushed off public debate at all, I've taken the isues on board and done something about them.

[Cyclone]

You'd be wrong then wouldn't you.

 

Dear Mr. Cyclone{Not my real surname},

 

Your email has been passed to Councillor Auckland for response as the appropriate Cabinet Member. We are looking into the issues you raise and will write again as soon as we are able.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Tracey Hollis

 

I had a call from someone yesterday, but missed it and will be following up with an email in reply to them.

 

I've also (as you've seen) had a response from the ICO, which says that no one from the council or planning department has so much as had a conversation with them regarding the potential legal implications.

 

Maybe you feel like you've taken the issues on board, I don't. I've seen your responses and every time a concern is raised you poo poo it, dismiss it or claim that the greater good outweighs it. You aren't concerned about the privacy issues, you just want to make them go away or prove that they don't exist.

[brianthedog]

I'm not "glibly" brushing anything off, I'm explaining the reality of consultation.

 

I was responding to Captain Scarlets point about all the people who had made negative posts about ANPR. In reality that amounts to a handful of people. Out of half a million Sheffielders, that doesn't amount to a tidal wave of public opinion, does it?

Of the people who have expressed concerns on here, as far as I'm aware, NOT ONE has contacted the Council directly to express that concern. That gives me an indication of how deep and widely held those concerns are. However, I do actually value public debate and I think there have been valid points made here.

 

In fact, as far as I can see, the only person who's actually done anything practical about progressing the concerns raised here is me! You'll probably say, "that's what we pay you for" and yes, I'll agree. I've done my job and raised those points with the officers concerned and I'm continuing to press them. So no, I haven't "glibly" brushed off public debate at all, I've taken the isues on board and done something about them.

 

No, you're quite right that it doesn't. However, did half a million Sheffielders get asked about this, directly? I've objected to various issues to the Sheffield council in the past - it's not an easy process. A lot of people are concerned about privacy - so why on earth would the council feel that a public consultation was not required?

[Captain_Scarlet]

You say "we've" all commented. What that basically adds up to is a few of the usual suspects moaning about the usual subjects. That is fine, but you and the (very) few others who share your views are not the majority on this Forum or in the wider world.

Don't take feedback from this thread as a health indicator of how people perceive the work done...

In my view SF gives similar results to most consultation / public involvement exercises. Most people have a look at what is being discussed, like to be informed, but don't have a particular view one way or the other. Some people are in favour of what's being proposed and will say so, others are vehemently against and will say so. On the Forum, that equates to threads being viewed perhaps by thousands, but there only being perhaps a hundred posts, by about 20 people.

That'd called a bulletin board, nothing new there.

I don't feel that your picture of how much one officer can influence things is realistic. There are teams of people doing each type of activity the Council are involved in. Individual officers are in charge of individual projects (of which there are many), but they are steered by managers and politicians and of course, politicians take the final decisions.

you have short memory, whilst I've only had the pleasure of your postings I have laughed at the work you, your colleagues, former colleagues and people like you have done, if it appears I've targeted you if it is because you're posting.

It's very difficult to make traffic "better". Opportunities like the new Inner Relief Road project are few and far between. Mostly, these days, it's about managing the growth in traffic and associated worsening of congestion in order to keep things moving as well as possible. That's a country-wide trend and is not particular to Sheffield.

It is not difficult if you have the will to resolve the issue. If you would prefer to do less and think of the near future instead of long term investments then sure but if when you see you have space to do better and ignore it then I'm afraid I'll have to remind you of the good thing to do (such as removing the bus gates on Bridge Street, Wicker, Cemetery Road, Hillsbro, all bus lanes etc). I've not only commented on Sheffield, the M42's traffic management system is another utter fiasco, a system that actually decides to create traffic jams during off peak hours!

You repeatedly defended no parking schemes and yourself admitted you did not want to provide a solution by looking at one single item on a list of users and problems. You have in the same way admitted to making decisions to prevent use of personal vehicles (which selfishly targets every road user, including lorries, taxis and buses).

The decisions you say you have made are so narrow minded, so disrespectful to us and inappropriate as a traffic management solution.

 

A factor you have omitted is that of the people who just read and not contribute, an equal proportion of by standers will not post because they are sure that whether they would comment, their comments would be ignored.

I'm not "glibly" brushing anything off, I'm explaining the reality of consultation.

 

I was responding to Captain Scarlets point about all the people who had made negative posts about ANPR. In reality that amounts to a handful of people. Out of half a million Sheffielders, that doesn't amount to a tidal wave of public opinion, does it?

 

Of the people who have expressed concerns on here, as far as I'm aware, NOT ONE has contacted the Council directly to express that concern. That gives me an indication of how deep and widely held those concerns are. However, I do actually value public debate and I think there have been valid points made here.

 

In fact, as far as I can see, the only person who's actually done anything practical about progressing the concerns raised here is me! You'll probably say, "that's what we pay you for" and yes, I'll agree. I've done my job and raised those points with the officers concerned and I'm continuing to press them. So no, I haven't "glibly" brushed off public debate at all, I've taken the isues on board and done something about them.

You'd be wrong:

 

From: White Patricia (CLLR) [mailto: Patricia.White@sheffield.gov.uk]

Sent: 31 May 2009 16:16

To: The Batcave

Cc: France Colin (CLLR); Qadar Ali (CLLR)

Subject: Re: Sheffield Council ANPR

 

Dear Captain Scarlet,

Thankkyou for your email in which you raise concerns about the ANPR

System.I am forwarding your email to Cllr Ian Auckland, Cabinet Member For Transport and Sustainable Development for a response.

Yours sincerely,

Pat White(Cllr)

We moan here but we do a lot more behind the stage, I'd like to think that as independent tax paying and hard working citizen that can tie their own shoe laces in the morning we can do things without reporting our every move on the forum like twelve year old Nightwish listening Blog addicts (that's a fair few social economic classes taken care of in a swooping generalisation; I thank you).

I'd rather be talking to my councillors and then report what's happened after a conversation has been had rather than when I cried like a baby in the first email. Just so that I can actually report something, I'm not a civil servant, I don't have to keep a minute by minute journal of my activities. MS Project FTL.

 

We wouldn't be contacting the council directly as local councillors are our point of contact with the political world. I have however included our Council leader in my original email since him and I spoke about Tesco's invasion of Sheffield a few months back. I emailed my three local councillors about mid page fourteen.

 

I think the honourable members of the forum have made points I share eloquently, I thank them.

[Ravenger]

It's the old adage that it's better to do something dodgy and apologise for it later, than ask permission to do it in advance. You avoid little things like public consultation that way.

[Planner1]

You'd be wrong then wouldn't you.

 

I had a call from someone yesterday, but missed it and will be following up with an email in reply to them.

 

I've also (as you've seen) had a response from the ICO, which says that no one from the council or planning department has so much as had a conversation with them regarding the potential legal implications.

 

Maybe you feel like you've taken the issues on board, I don't. I've seen your responses and every time a concern is raised you poo poo it, dismiss it or claim that the greater good outweighs it. You aren't concerned about the privacy issues, you just want to make them go away or prove that they don't exist.

 

Yes you spoke to a body that the SYITS project wouldn't have consulted because there isn't any legal position on the use of ANPR, as a number of posters on here have pointed out.

 

I asked the officers dealing with the project. Communications which come via Councillors get to them via their senior managers, so may not have landed in their in-box yet. Still, only two people seem to have made any communication with the Council, which proves my point about it not being a widespread view.

 

I understand that people have concerns regarding privacy. I respect other people's views and fairly represent them in discussions on this subject. If I wasn't interested in he subject and wanted the issue to go away, I wouldn't be having the debate on here and be taking the trouble to raise the issue with the relevant officers and project steering group, would I?

[Planner1]

It's the old adage that it's better to do something dodgy and apologise for it later, than ask permission to do it in advance. You avoid little things like public consultation that way.

 

The system in question is not even remotely "dodgy". It's not illegal, it's all above board and already in use in lots of places.

 

It's not really the kind of thing that public consultation tends to take place around. That tends to happen when there are legal orders to be made or there are physical changes being made to the highway network. In those situations, there is a requirement to consult.

Edited June 5, 2009 by Planner1