Amanda Martin

So yes, Maggie May, it's just another road application !

Amey and Parsons Brinkerhoff were asked to look at this road along with the western and eastern bypasses. It's part of a wider agenda for a new strategic route through Hereford to the east. Undermine the eastern crossing and link to the A438 Ledbury Road and you take with it the southern link road which cannot justify its business case without the eastern link. The proposal made back in 2008 was to build a new road between somewhere on the A438 Ledbury Road running through to Hampton Park Road with a bridge across the river crossing at Hampton Park Road linking into the Rotherwas access road which is currently almost unused. Through traffic would then pass via the southern link road onto the A465 and down to South Wales, or up to the M5 at junction 7. Essentially Hereford would end up with two trunk routes, one to the east and one to the west - traffic would get worse in the city. None of this would solve Hereford's transport problems but it would bring development and therefore profits and would fulfil the LEP's growth agenda. I would support a bridge only option at Hampton Park Road linked to a package of traffic reduction measures for the city: more effective and a hell of a lot cheaper. Our problem is we're fighting the Marches LEP not just the Council.

OK well we have to start from where we are. What has really upset me about this result is not so much losing my own seat but our IOC contingent having to sit impotently by while the Cabinet trash the county. John Harrington and I came into this from a particular perspective. On the transport/development stuff there was a lot riding on IOC gaining traction - now that that fox has been shot for the time being (just reminded myself that the Tories will repeal the hunting ban), there remains a serious and imminent problem. The bulldozers are on the horizon. Stopping the M4 Relief Road in 1995 was a mammoth effort: exhausting, all consuming and expensive. I asked myself, and Julian, whether I could do it all again. I'm 20 years older, no longer rich, probably not as effective and not in a relationship with a man who doesn't care where I am as long as I'm not spoiling his symphony. If I set a campaign hare running, I'm in it for the long haul and this time round could risk prosecution as well - the State is not as tolerant as it used to be. Then I think about Mike and Jean Harris and the destruction of the Lugg Meadows and I can't just sit by and do nothing. I've made my decision. I'm going to try to mobilise the people in Mike and Jean's area and in Bartestree, Tupsley and the east of the city who would be badly hit should the eastern link get the go ahead - from this we can try to generate a wider debate about transport in Hereford. I've read the consultants' reports on the various road schemes planned and now understand the wider agenda: to the west a housing boom and to the east a new strategic route by stealth. Amey and Parsons Brinkerhoff rejected the eastern link on traffic and environmental grounds and PB reported flaws in the assessments for the southern link but it won't stop the LEP and Cabinet from pushing them. The land has already been pegged and the planning application is imminent. There is a mountain of reports out there. Having read most of them, I have come round to the view that Amey or Parsons Brinkerhoff need to model the effect of a new bridge without the additional 3km section that would wreck Holywell Gutter Lane and Bartestree, depending on which route was chosen, and degrade the east of the city for a new trunk route through Hereford which of course is the LEP's objective. Jeanharris, I've heard on the grapevine that Jesse might support limiting the eastern scheme to a bridge only option - just the bridge, no link road. If we can get some traction behind this, it removes much of the rationale behind the southern link road. This, with the traffic reduction measures I've proposed, could be the answer. I'm convinced this is the way forward. I'm anti road building, not for the sake of it but because in most cases new roads don't solve the problem but I see the sense in another river crossing. We need to start writing to Jesse and to get access to him urgently and I hope councillors in affected wards will respond too. Ironically the other councillor whose ward is in the front line is Dave Greenow and who did win Stoney Street? If we don't act now, the resulting destruction is going to make the Edgar Street tree episode look like a bit of light pruning. In the meantime, Jeanharris, you need to decide whether you and Mike are up for the fight. I can tell you it's gruelling but democracy is a two way street and I know that if enough people get involved they could put pressure on their ward councillors. There are plenty of instances where local campaigns have changed minds and this is a local authority scheme - it should be stoppable. We could organise some public meetings and a demo at Plough Lane on the day the planning application is decided but we don't have much time. It's people power that will stop these roads now, not debate in the Chamber.

Yes I have noticed that, TSH. I've also noticed that the new lane has made no difference whatever to the traffic problem on the south bound Edgar Street. I don't really understand Polly's position on this. During the campaign she memorably commented that it was "just a few trees" and we should move on. To us, of course, it was a symptom of the wider problem of city degradation and the effect of this on economic vitality etc. Local economies need trees it seems. I might have anticipated that she would step up to defend her ward from the Tory barbarians but she didn't - she just went along with it. It didn't make sense.

TSH, I think the reason I was fielded in Widemarsh was to do with my transport planning background. Moorfields suffers badly from the traffic problem in the city and the idea was to deploy me to talk to the Highways Agency about the A49 if and when the occasion arose. In the aftermath of the Edgar Street tree campaign - which drew me and John Harrington into local politics in the first place - we met Jesse Norman and the Highways Agency to discuss Colin's "Lights Out" scheme - Colin attended that meeting also. The HA promised to model the network to assess the effects of this and I wanted them to look at reassigning road space on the A49 to cyclists. The HA never came back to us and we didn't press them because everyone thought that, after May 7th, there would a more sensible Council to deal with them directly. Polly clearly had a loyal following in Widemarsh. In spite of being a Lib Dem she doesn't agree with me on the transport issues and didn't oppose the Edgar Street pinch point scheme but, you know, she's the widow of a respected local GP and I was an anonymous lawyer! 'Nuff said !

Entirely agree with mikefitz, Denise Lloyd and others but I suspect that decisions have been taken against a moving backdrop. Historically, at least some of the Independents will have become Independents for a reason: they didn't like the Tory junta. Meanwhile, IOC's start had not risen high enough for them to have the confidence to accept the olive branches that I understand have, in fact, been offered at various points. I don't know the man personally but I understand Cllr Matthews may have been more interested in maintaining his power base than winning seats against the Tories and the rest is history. We've said it publicly and among ourselves that we're more than happy to look beyond the rosette. As long as someone is decent, shares IOC's ethical principles and has Herefordshire's interests at heart, we're happy to work with them. Our dialogue with the Greens was a case in point. Unfortunately the Green surge everyone hoped for did not materialise but hindsight is a wonderful thing. Some people have commented on IOC's low profile. I think this was absolutely the problem along with our inability to field a candidate at all in twelve wards. Even members of my own family told me they wouldn't have heard of us had it not been for my candidacy. I'm not saying we should all start shaving our heads or getting into baths of baked beans but we have to have a presence in the community - it's not enough to be effective in the chamber alone.

Lol, Dippy, elections are bad for your mental health. I have eaten 3/4 of a slice of toast and a glass of Cava! Oh well, I've tried democracy. Now I need to get back to rabble rousing. :-)

Thanks Dippy

Thanks for that explanation Glenda

Yes, thank you gk

Chris definitely and thank you. I think Herefordshire could be entering a period of crisis now and, when you look at the vote, on a fairly flimsy mandate. Whatever the colour of our rosettes, all of us with the good of Herefordshire at heart should be talking about what we have in common.

OK so some of my supporters thought they could vote for Polly AND me. The questions is were they misled into thinking that? I need to check how many spoiled papers I had - if it was less than 23 it's irrelevant for me but could matter a good deal for my fellow candidates.

The information I am getting is that people were told that they needed to vote for two candidates. No more details at the moment. It's inexplicable but IOC are a new party and not yet so established that everyone would have heard of us. I spoke to many people at the launch of the manifesto who had not heard of us but who pledged their vote after our pitch. I believe we lost five wards by less than twenty votes and in the end I lost by 23. In these circumstances, any malfeasance needs to be investigated. It's a very odd way of spoiling your paper. Normally people will write a message or leave it blank, or mark the paper in a way that cannot be decisive in any candidate's favour.

It made pretty painful reading to chart the descent from optimism to disbelief and utter dismay. It should have been a good day for IOC and I just don't understand it either, Dippy. gk you will never know how much difference your post made to my morale. You're right. This can't be the end. We need to foster ties with all potential allies. I personally don't care what colour rosette someone is wearing; if they're fundamentally decent, I'm happy to talk to them. It grieves me that people like Jean and Mike Harris had so much riding on these results and my IOC colleagues are now powerless to help them, but we don't need to stand by and watch a rout. We need to mobilise public opinion as much and as quickly as possible and I think we need to turn to our MP for help now. He has to get off the fence and decide where his loyalties are. With this kind of mandate, the Cabinet are going to run amok - we haven't seen anything yet. Jesse Norman is the only one who can limit the damage now. We need to get his attention and ensure that he understands the full implications of what the Cabinet is planning. Weirdly on the subject of spoiled votes, I noticed a lot of mine had two crosses. I'm reluctant to jump to any conclusions - surely our electoral system is trustworthy - but I can't help thinking about it. I was a vote counter in the 2010 election and I can't remember seeing one ballot paper spoiled in this way. There is something very odd about the Saxon Gate result.

I've been busy reading the various route assessment reports by Amey and PB - there are quite a few. It would appear that the southern link road was assessed at the same time as a western bypass and eastern link. All were were proposed by the old Cabinet and supported by the Marches LEP who are not interested in resolving Hereford's congestion problems but are interested in creating new strategic routes by stealth between the M5 and South Wales. Interestingly, the eastern link was recommended for rejection by Amey on traffic and environmental grounds and Parsons Brinkerhoff confirmed that, whilst they had some reservations about the robustness of Amey's assessments on noise, air quality and noted the omission of some scheduled monuments from the mapping, they did largely endorse Amey's recommendations to reject the eastern link and, without it, I cannot see how the southern link road can justify its economic and business case. Regarding the southern link road itself, some mistakes were made in assessing "environmental constraints" but i haven't digested this completely yet. Amey's eastern link and crossing assessment referred to several route possibilities: some running from Ledbury Road to Hampton Park Road and then across to the Rotherwas Access Road and others running from a point between Bartestree and Hereford. Amey identified various significant traffic impacts for Bartestree from the outer link options and for Bodenham Road, Aylestone Hill, Hafod Road and Eign Road for the inner link options. The outer link options would destroy the Lugg Meadows. What no-one has yet modelled is the impact of a bridge only, positioned where Amey has already located one, between Hampton Park Road and Rotherwas and I think this should be explored further, not in isolation but in conjunction with traffic reduction measures for the city wide network. I see the sense in re-assigning some of the traffic trying to leave Hereford on the A49 that currently has to cross the city from the east and would like to see how a crossing on its own would affect the rest of the network. It could work. The LEP of course, don't want to look at a smaller scale, local solution as this doesn't fit with their growth agenda, although I'm speculating. I think the key to stopping the southern link road lies in revisiting the eastern link and dealing with short journeys within the city network. Just my opinion but if I get a chance I will propose this.

...although from what I'm hearing it's just as well some of my colleagues are out and about.

As opposed to irritating people at the Polling Station? :-) It's done and dusted now: what will be, will be.

Thank you - yes I mean £45k !

I've just caught up with this. Most IOC councillors elected today will be new in the post but, if you look at the past expenses claims of our sitting councillors, I think you'll find that moderation and restraint came unprompted. I think I'm already on record as saying that, in my opinion, anyone claiming £45 pa in expenses is in local politics for the wrong reason.

If there is any suggestion that we may be in the pocket of developers, I think we would like to know how this rumour has come to fruition. I'm certainly not aware of any donation that could compromise our impartiality.

mikefitz - I suppose, as any organisation grows in size, it becomes more difficult to repel borders against corruption and self interest but the thing that attracted me to It's Our County was the obvious decency and integrity of Anthony Powers, Liz Harvey, Mark Hubbard and everyone else I have met. Although I would love to be able to buy up Herefordshire's neglected historic buildings (the fate of Hampton Dene House keeps me awake at night) and have a property portfolio of accommodation to lovingly refurbish and rent out, I am not interested in either money or power for their own sake. I am personally unshmoozable and, from what I have seen so far, I believe this applies to the rest of the party too.

Thanks Adrian. mikefitz, we're mostly self funded. I and my fellow candidates have contributed according to our means. It's been run on a shoe string thanks mainly to John Harrington, Mark Lewis and Charlie Nicholls who have been manning the office and surviving on stress, caffeine and Werther's Originals for weeks. I think we do have one or two local benefactors but I've no idea to what extent or who they are, except that they are not corporate sponsors, not that that's entirely relevant : the point about donors is not that they donate but that they eventually expect something in return. For that reason I think all donors should be identified but it's difficult: some people would rather remain anonymous for all sorts of reasons other than that they expect to call in the favour at some future date.

IOC are limited to Herefordshire because they exist only in Herefordshire.

I was struck by the comment about "queue culture". People stressed and frustrated by sitting in traffic jams resent the progress made by people on bikes; they can't move so they don't want anyone else to move either. It takes a critical mass of people to change behaviour. It's not only cyclists who suffer from the tyranny of driver arrogance - pedestrians are just as much at risk. People in cars won't tolerate being held up even for a few seconds and it's very interesting to watch pedestrian behaviour and the implied deference to drivers in the body language. Have you ever noticed how elderly pedestrians will drag themselves across as fast as possible so as not to hold a driver up, even where they have priority? It's as if someone is cracking a whip behind them. Try taking a bit longer than the allowed five seconds to cross a busy road and see what the response is. Last October, I saw someone who was clearly "special needs" blasted up on Ledbury Road. She hadn't stepped out: she was already in the process of crossing when the driver turned right from Eign Road and was confronted with a slight delay. This is how low we have sunk as a society. We're not yet ripping cyclists' arms off and throwing them in ditches but Coroners are already blaming dead cyclists for not having dressed up like a builder before venturing out. Well: they were "asking for it", weren't they?

Yes I wondered that. So, the old trees are gone, the new trees are dead, the approach to the city is spoiled, the Conservation area is degraded and the traffic problem is worse than ever. An unmitigated success then.