Search Results

It is polling day today and an excellent chance to have a Labour voice representing Bedfordshire. I have got to know David over the last few months and, apart from being a good listener, a rare quality in a politician, he will bring the knowledge of 30 years of front line Police experience to the role. David has a track record of speaking out against injustice, and speaking up for what is right. The role of a Police and Crime Commissioner is to be a ‘critical friend’ to the Police service, a role which David’s personal qualities and experience mean he is by far the most suitable candidate. He has my full support. I hope he will have yours too. Vote David Michael 1st Preference. Julian Vaughan Labour General Election candidate for NE Bedfordshire 2017 & 2019 An infographic with David pictured in Langford, Bedfordshire, alongside his five pledges David’s five pledges: Bear down on violent crime and county lines drug dealing A visible Police presence in our communities Enhanced support, care and concern for the victims of crime Communities and the Police working together Establish an anti-racist Bedfordshire Police Find out more about David at his website: https://www.david4bedfordshire.org.uk/ Get directions to your polling station here: https://iwillvote.org.uk/ Join the Labour Party here: https://join.labour.org.uk/ #luton #police #labourparty #Bedfordshire #DavidMichael #bedford #crime #TheLabourParty #policeandcrimecommissioner

Of all our great British institutions the British pub is arguably held in the fondest regard. However, there is no doubt that they are in serious decline, particularly in rural areas where their value to the community is greatest. There were 63,500 pubs in the UK in 1990. By 2018 this number had fallen to 47,600. Although there was a small rise in 2019, the pandemic may have put the final nail in the coffin of many pubs that were just getting by. While many pubs have turned to food to boost income, the number of staff serving food in pubs overtaking bar staff numbers in 2016, there is particular concern over ‘wet’ pubs not serving food. Of course it could be argued that if pubs are so important to communities, then why are they being abandoned in such large numbers? This blog will briefly go through the potential reasons for the decline and the impact pub closures may have on our society. I speak from the perspective of someone who has worked in pubs, has some of my best memories sitting in them, as well as a fair bit of time where my memory of them is a bit hazy, and has witnessed and been a part of the change in our society’s habits. Mr and Mrs Moore looking in at the local There’s no doubt that the changing culture at the workplace has had an influence on pub use. In the past the trip down the pub was a feature of many work lunchtimes. However the drive for greater work productivity has resulted to a large extent in the curtailment of the lunchtime session. Of course it’s not just overzealous Human Resources managers who have changed the pub going habits of the British public. A major factor has to be cost, as pubs now compete with cheaper supermarket drink with ‘off-sale’ prices doubling, while pub prices have quadrupled in the last 30 years. This has contributed to supermarket beer sales overtaking pub sales in 2015 and an increasing number of people see the pint or two down the pub as too expensive a luxury. So why does it matter? Who cares if we are having an ale sitting on the sofa at home, rather than propped up against the bar down our local? Perhaps more than any other institution the pub is where different social classes and different age groups will come together in a social setting. Pubs also play a role in reducing loneliness, which is an ever increasing factor in a more connected, but equally more fragmented society. As a barman I knew that the chats I had with a few of the regulars who would quietly nurse a couple of pints in the corner, would likely be their main social interaction of the day. Pubs take us out of the echo chamber of social media, where in the main we only speak to people who see the world the way we do. They give us an opportunity to listen to other views and discuss matters with the benefit of the visual cues and expressions that are absent from the toxic culture of social media. The keyboard warriors that we know so well wouldn’t last two minutes in a pub debate, silenced not by violence, but the consensus of the crowd. The social interactions that take place within pubs enhance social cohesion, breaking down barriers and creating a sense of community and pride, far more effectively than any flag waving. A loss of a village pub, particularly if it is the last one standing, has such a negative impact as it is often the only location where residents would mix together. The Red Lion in Biggleswade, which closed in 2018 Of course tastes change, but where communities mixing together are replaced by isolated meets in each other’s houses, or just drinking at home alone, we lose something as communities, which can’t be adequately replaced by digital means of social interaction. Now before I’m seen to be painting our pubs and bars as a panacea for all our social discord, I’ve seen plenty of fights in pubs where matters have got out of hand. However, and at the risk of repeating unwanted advice to my teenage daughter, actual real interaction with real people reduces the likelihood of misunderstandings, that are an ever present hazard of social media. The Coronavirus pandemic has shown us the importance of community and the need for social interaction. Ironically, it has probably been the last straw for many pubs across the UK, at the same time as libraries and youth centres are closing down, starved of public funding. Pubs play a vital role in our communities and bring intangible benefits, which although they may not be able to be counted or measured, benefit UK society as a whole. We should do all we can to support them. Julian Vaughan April 2021 To find out what you can do to support your local pubs, apart from go and drink in them of course, I recommend taking a look at the CAMRA website which has many ideas around a fair deal for pubs and what to do if your local is under threat. https://camra.org.uk/ To end on some good news. The New Inn, Biggleswade, featured in the blog title is looking to re-open before the end of 2021. ***Update April 2022*** The development company which purchased ‘The New Inn’ has now dropped plans to re-open the pub and the ‘Red Lion’ site now has planning permission for a housing development. #villages #community #loneliness #pubs #beer

The government’s Levelling Up Fund prospectus published in March 2021 sets out how the Department for Transport (DfT), the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government, and the Treasury will invest £4.8 billion in ‘high value infrastructure’. The foreword by Rishi Sunak states how this funding will remove the silos between departments allowing local authorities to focus on the highest priority local projects, with the mission to ‘unite and level up the country’. The fund will run between 2021 and 2025 and will have different themes in each of the financial years. For 2021/22 the three themes are: Transport Investments. Regeneration and town centre investment. Cultural Investment. The fund prospectus then goes on to set out the three themes in greater detail. The transport section (page 9 of the prospectus) then goes on to describe the benefits of investment in local transport networks and how they can make a real difference to local communities. It states that projects submitted under the transport investment scheme may include: Investments in new or existing cycling provision. Improved priority for local bus services. Enhanced public transport facilities, such as bus stops and stations. Accessibility improvements to local transport networks for disabled people. Enhancements and upgrades to local road networks (e.g. by-passes and junction improvements). Structural maintenance to local roads, including bridges. Multi-modal proposals which combine two or more interventions to enhance transport across modes. This sounds like brilliant news for accessibility projects as at the current rate of progress the Department for Transport’s ‘Access for All’ fund won’t deliver full step-free access for the UK rail network until the 2070’s. However, taking a look at the accompanying technical notes to the prospectus, the reference to accessibility improvements is omitted entirely, as shown below. Levelling Up Fund Technical Notes – Appendix B pages 18,19 If this is just an error then it should be corrected immediately as there is a very tight deadline of 18th June 2021 for bid applications, and local councils may be guided by the notes not to apply for projects that improve accessibility in their area. However, if the technical notes are correct is clearly shows that the government are prioritising road building over transport accessibility improvements, which is bizarre considering their claims to be leading the way on fighting climate change and levelling up the UK. I have considered that accessibility improvements may not have been included due to the availability of ‘Access for All’ funding from the DfT. However, if that is the case then why are road improvements included in the ‘Levelling Up’ scheme when there is a multi-billion pound fund already available for road building and maintenance. Steps at Leagrave station, Bedfordshire Once again it seems that accessibility improvements are low on the priority list for this government which seems to regard accessibility as a favour not a right. Disabled people already face numerous barriers to prevent them from being able to travel independently. If we really want to ‘level up’ the UK a good place to start would be the UK rail network. We can and must do better than this. Julian Vaughan Chair Bedfordshire Rail Access Network twitter @juliman66 #stepfreeaccess #integratedtransport #accessibility #publictransport #climatechange

Since ‘Access for All’ funding for accessibility improvements to the UK rail network was introduced in 2006, around 200 stations have been made step-free. However, much of the UK rail network remains a no-go area for disabled people. Leagrave station in Luton, Bedfordshire is one of the busiest stations in the UK that is still practically inaccessible to wheelchair users, those with reduced mobility and parents with young children. This blog sets out the specific issues at Leagrave, what criteria are used to decide which stations receive funding and an example of a successful campaign. The main entrance to Leagrave station Leagrave is one of three rail stations in the city of Luton and serves the North of Luton as well as nearby Houghton Regis and Dunstable. The other two stations in Luton are ‘Luton Airport Parkway’, which serves the nearby airport and ‘Luton’, which is located in the town centre. Luton station was originally awarded ‘Access for All’ funding in 2014, although this funding was later deferred in 2016 by the ‘Hendy Review’ to the current railway Control Period 2019-2024. The access improvements at Luton will form part of a wider redevelopment in the area. At this time Luton Airport Parkway is the only step-free station in Luton. Luton’s three stations – Leagrave, Luton and Luton Parkway. Currently only Luton Parkway is step-free Leagrave station has four platforms, as set out in the diagram below. Trains towards London and beyond to Gatwick etc. leave from platform one. Trains from London and heading further North stop at platform two. Platforms three and four are pretty much redundant as the two tracks serving these tracks are for East Midlands trains that don’t stop at the station. This same set up, with slight variations, is repeated at other stations on this section of the line such as Harlington and Flitwick. Leagrave station plan Of the four platforms, only two have step-free access – platform one and platform four. Platform one is for trains to London and wheelchair users are able to board a train and travel with relative ease, although they still need a ramp. However, on the return trip a wheelchair user will arrive at platform two, which can only be exited by using a set of stairs. Therefore, as virtually every journey involves a round trip, this station is unusable for wheelchair users and those with restricted mobility. It is also an assault course for parents with children in buggies who either bounce the buggy up the stairs with their child in it (not recommended) carry a buggy in one hand and their child in the other (hardly ideal or safe) or wait for a helpful fellow passenger. Leagrave does have an accessible toilet, but it is located on a platform at which no trains stop. This really is just ticking a box, without any thought to the actual needs of wheelchair users and those with reduced mobility. Below are passenger numbers (from highest to lowest) for every station in Bedfordshire. Leagrave station has around 1.8m passengers per year and is the most heavily used station in Bedfordshire that has not been allocated ‘Access for All’ funding to provide step-free access. Just on this criteria alone Leagrave should be at the top of the list for step-free improvements, but there are many other factors by which a station gets allocated funding. Below are the relevant criteria set out by the Department for Transport, which the Train Operating Companies (TOCs) complete for each station and then rank accordingly. This information is then sent back to the Department for Transport who are the decision makers in which stations are allocated funding. This is an opaque process and neither the TOCs nor the Department for Transport are willing to, publicly at least, release the ranking order or give details on the content of the bids. Looking through the list above I am confident, having spoken to them, that any bid for Leagrave will have the support of the current TOC (Govia Thameslink Railway) that manages the station. It will certainly have our (Bedfordshire Rail Access Network) support and we have already had a very positive meeting with the local MP, Sarah Owen, who has personal experience of the accessibility problems at the station. As I pointed out above, Leagrave certainly has the required footfall to be considered for funding. Our campaign will seek to engage local community support as well as support of the local council, more details on how we achieved this for the successful bid for funding at Biggleswade station below. The number of ‘passenger assists’ relates to the requests for ramp assistance at the station as well as taxi requests for those that cannot use the station. I’m not sure how accurate or useful this information is, as many potential travellers may just not bother attempting to travel and the inaccessibility of platform two at the station will discourage most wheelchair users from using the station. ‘Match funding’ relates to pots of cash that may be made available by local councils or regional development organisations. Obviously if the Department for Transport (DfT) can avoid footing the entire bill, they may look more favourably at a scheme. The DfT will also look at the nearest fully accessible station to the one bidding for funding. If there is no alternative nearby, then this will be a factor in ranking that particular bid higher in the list of stations. In the case of Leagrave the nearest accessible station is currently Luton Parkway. Although Luton and Flitwick stations have been granted funding in principle, they are some way off from completion. Finally the bid matrix also looks at any local factors that would increase the numbers of people with disabilities using the station. Although not within the 800m range indicated in the list, it is worth pointing out that Leagrave is the nearest rail station to Luton and Dunstable hospital which is 1.6km (1 mile) away. On the basis of the above it seems that Leagrave has an extremely strong case, but nothing is ‘in the bag’ until a successful bid has been announced, and even then there can be issues, as the long suffering users of Luton station which was first granted funding back in 2014 will be sure to point out. Our successful campaign for funding for Biggleswade started many years ago and we as the BRAN campaign team are just finishing off the work started by other campaigners. We became involved back in 2017 and we weren’t the first campaign. Below are some of the steps that we took to assist with what was ultimately a successful bid. Petitions may seem a bit old hat these days, and there is always a suspicion that they are mainly used to get you on a mailing list, however they do give a useful indication of the level of support for your campaign and is something concrete that indicates community support. They are also a great way of getting publicity for your campaign as it gets shared out across social media. Perhaps the most important step is to get a seat at the table with the people who put the bid together. In the case of the Biggleswade campaign this was with Network Rail, GTR, local and town councillors and Alistair Burt, the local MP at the time. This is not an easy step and it took some negotiating to achieve, the first offer was just allowing one person from our campaign team to attend a meeting! However, I have to say that Alistair was very supportive of the campaign and although we were political adversaries, having ran against each other in the 2017 General Election, we worked very well together throughout. I am just the spokesperson for BRAN, and we have wheelchair users and visually impaired people on our team who provide ‘lived experience’ and expertise in accessibility issues. Until we became involved there was no-one sitting at the table who would actually directly benefit from the improvements that were being proposed. Through various political connections, the lack of step-free access at Biggleswade station was raised in the European Parliament, as well as in the House of Commons and again this fed into providing more publicity for the campaign. We were also delighted to welcome the Shadow Transport team to Biggleswade for a site visit, which in turn was reported in the local press. We soon became the focal point for any accessibility issues and would be contacted by local radio and TV for our comments. The main aim of the campaign was to make sure that as many of the criteria were met as possible, and ensure that there was a groundswell of support and publicity that would make it difficult for the bid to be rejected. If local councillors, MPs and the Train Companies know that they are going to get a difficult time if a bid is turned down it does tend to concentrate minds. Above all, we were aware that we couldn’t do it on our own and needed to work with all the other stakeholders to maximise the chance of success. This doesn’t mean being a pushover, and we were not hesitant in firmly putting across our case, but it was done with respect for other views and awareness that you rarely get everything that you want. The GRIP (Governance for Rail Infrastructure Projects) stages used for all UK rail projects It is also a challenge to manage expectations. Nothing involving the railway takes place quickly. Add in all the other interested parties and everything seems to take an age. There are no quick wins here and you should cater for being in it for the long haul. Taking our Biggleswade campaign as an example, we began the campaign in 2017 and we expect the station to be step-free in 2022. Where there isn’t the same level of collaborative working, political support or sense of urgency, bids do fail. Flitwick station was a prime example of this, failing in the original application, and only given the go-ahead after additional funding was made available. The Bedfordshire Rail Access Network Team outside the the DfT in November 2018 before delivering the petition on ‘deadline day’ for the bids Even when a bid is successful such as Biggleswade (announced on April 2019) there is still much work to do as potential designs are looked at in greater detail. This is where it is vital that people with disabilities are involved so that problems aren’t designed into the development, which become very difficult to correct at a later stage. We continue to meet on a regular basis with Network Rail, Richard Fuller MP and others and the design team have accepted a number of alterations that we have put forward. As far as Leagrave station goes, we will look at all available options for funding. We have already indicated to GTR that we view Leagrave as a priority (along with Arlesey station) and we will make sure that we have a seat at the table when these are being discussed. At every meeting we will be guided by the four principles set out below: If you’re campaigning for step-free access for your local station, or thinking of doing so, we hope the experiences set out above will be of some help. However, we don’t claim to have all the answers and we are learning all the time. Do get in touch if you have campaign ideas, or just want some moral support. These campaigns are ‘slow burners’ and it can often seem that you are banging your head against a brick wall. However, the prize of an accessible station, removing the barriers that prevent people with disabilities from playing a full part in our society is most definitely one worth fighting for. We’re up for the challenge and trust you are too! You can email us at: bedsrailaccessnetwork@gmail.com Follow us on Facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/BedfordshireRailAccessNetwork or follow our Twitter account at: https://twitter.com/BedsRailAccess Julian Vaughan Chair Bedfordshire Rail Access Network Twitter: @juliman66 4th April 2021 #stepfreeaccess #luton #accessibility #leagrave #Bedfordshire #publictransport #railways

Below is Bedfordshire Rail Access Network’s written response following a meeting with Central Bedfordshire Council regarding the current plans for the bus station, which will form part of the Biggleswade transport interchange. You can find the full details of the plans here: Case Documents – Central Bedfordshire Council The documents take a little time to load. “Firstly, thank you for being proactive and getting in touch with us. It is vital that the experience of people with disabilities is both listened to and acted upon at every stage of the process for transport projects like the Biggleswade Transport Interchange. A frequent and accessible transport system, with seamless connections between different transport modes is vital, both to reduce social isolation in our surrounding villages, reduce our reliance on the car and meet the challenge of achieving net zero carbon emissions. We fully support the principles behind the scheme. We also understand the limitations on the project due to space constraints in the area, namely the Network Rail boundary to the East, the current station forecourt to the North, and Station Road to the West. The proposed site of the bus interchange, looking South, with the rail tracks on the left and Station Road on the right However, we have a number of concerns which are listed below which need to be addressed before we can offer our full support to the scheme. • We cannot support what are termed ‘informal crossings’ which are present in the current plans as the principles on which they are based do not take into account the ‘lived experience’ of visually impaired people. • We discussed the guiding principles of shared space and informal crossings and we disagree that this has been a success in other areas. Again, while research in this area may provide statistics around the absence of injuries, this must not be seen in purely safety terms. To use the crossing safely, a visually impaired person has to endure long waiting periods before crossing the road, and then cannot be sure that the crossing is actually clear of cars. The safety statistics might look fine, but the actual, daily experience of visually impaired people using the crossings is in itself poor. • To encourage a modal shift away from the car, transport hubs must safe as well as accessible. We were advised at the meeting that the bus interchange will not be staffed. While we acknowledge that both the rail and bus network in this area are run by private companies it is disappointing that this is regarded as a somewhat unconventional request. A staffed transport hub will provide numerous benefits to customers and encourage greater use. An unstaffed hub will also increase the impression that this hub is little more than a large bus stop. • Having seen the plans and the artistic impressions, and while acknowledging the constraints of space previously mentioned, the bus interchange does have the look of a ‘glorified bus stop’. The plans indicate a solitary shelter, which looks like scant protection for bus users against wind and rain. Again, the lack of covered areas will dissuade people from using the hub and will present a far from welcoming feel to the area. We ask that a cantilever design is considered for additional shelters on the Eastern boundary of the bus interchange and in the area of the real time information hub. • There is a height difference between the general level of the proposed bus station and that of the station forecourt. However, in the artistic impressions this gradient does not appear. We took a look at the area today and estimate the height difference is in the region of three to four feet. We would be grateful if you could advise how this will be resolved and provide evidence of the gradient of the slope. • Finally, could you please provide further information about wheelchair access to the various platforms, particularly the island platform? The uncontrolled crossing, and presumably the ramp from the hub roadway, seems to arrive at about the same location as the bus’s passenger door would be loading/unloading. Apart from the congestion problems, this would appear to make the ramp very short and very steep. Also, can there be a ramp at both ends of the island platform, so as to avoid the perennial problem of wheelchair/pushchair users of having to go ‘the long way round and back’, when arriving from say, Saffron Road. The location of the proposed bus station for the Biggleswade Transport Interchange Once again we are supportive of the scheme, appreciate you getting in touch with us and acknowledge that some issues are beyond your control. However, we believe the current proposals do not provide the necessary infrastructure, both for people with visual impairments and the wider community. You will of course be aware that working within the regulations and recommendations in itself doesn’t necessarily provide a good experience for users. The layout of the current plans This is a great opportunity to make this hub truly useful to the needs of the wider Biggleswade community. We are realistic and understand compromises have to be made, but the views of disabled people must be acted upon, not just seen as a tick-box exercise. We look forward to continuing to work with you to get the best outcome for all. As requested we have not shared any plans, but as discussed on the phone, will be sharing our concerns when the application is in the public domain.” Kind regards Julian Vaughan Fiona Carey Paul Day Natalie Doig Bedfordshire Rail Access Network 25th March 2021 #stepfreeaccess #integratedtransport #biggleswade #buses #accessibility #Bedfordshire #publictransport #Transport

The last year has been a significant challenge to all of us as the pandemic has affected virtually every aspect of our lives. It has brought out both the best and worst in people, as we have seen communities working together to ensure no-one is left behind, at the same time as cronyism and a lack of accountability has become the norm in this incompetent and heartless government. However, we face even greater challenges ahead as this government rolls out the hostile environment even further, and threatens not only the fabric of our society, but also our democracy. In addition the climate emergency looms on the horizon, a challenge which requires collective action and sacrifice, rather than prioritising profits and individualism, a challenge this government seems spectacularly unsuited for. I decided to stand down as Chair of NE Beds CLP for a number of reasons, but primarily due to me spinning just too many plates – I want to do fewer things, hopefully far better. I’m very confident that Connell will do an excellent job as our new Chair and I will provide all the support required, should he need it. I can assure you that my commitment to the Labour cause remains undimmed and this will be the case, whoever is leader. I still hope to play some part of Labour’s path back to power, and intend to raise my profile not lower it in the next few years. I’ll continue to campaign for a more accessible railway While the pandemic curtailed normal CLP activities we haven’t been idle, and I’m delighted that one of my last actions as Chair was to drop off £400 of vouchers to our local food bank as part of our ‘Stop Holiday Hunger’ campaign. CLP’s are nothing if they are not active in their communities. Delighted to drop off food vouchers to Kathy at Preen, our brilliant local food bank in Biggleswade I attended my first CLP meeting just over four years ago, and since then I have been a candidate in two General Elections, one council election and an internal Labour National Executive Committee election. Not a bad shift, although finishing second can be a little tiresome. Thank you to all those who helped out in the campaigns, you were brilliant. During my time as Chair I hope I have made all sides of the Party feel welcome, whatever shade of red you are, and I’ll continue to work across political divides for the benefit of the community. I will remain Communications Officer for the CLP, covering our social media output. You can follow NE Beds CLP social media stuff here and here. I am aware that there are concerns about the new direction of our Party. However, I would urge members to avoid the infighting that does nothing for our cause, but plenty for our opponents. Political purity is all well and good, the difficult but more realistic path is one of compromise and cooperation. To use a football analogy, you may not always like the manager, but you would never think of supporting another team. I’m proud to be a H&S Rep for the ASLEF Union While continuing my role as a full-time Health and Safety Rep for the ASLEF union I will be spending more time dealing with transport accessibility issues as well pushing for better, greener public transport network across Bedfordshire. I will continue to write on a variety of issues in my blog which you can find here: https://julianvaughan.blog/ Stay safe and I look forward to seeing you in person, rather than online, at some point during this year. Julian Vaughan Julian Vaughan (@juliman66) / Twitter Julian Vaughan (@jvaughan_photos) • Instagram photos and videos Julian Vaughan | Facebook #accessibility #labourparty #unity

Like much of government policy these days, most of the budget was leaked out to the press well before the Chancellor stood up in the House of Commons to deliver his hour long speech setting out his tax and spending plans for the next few years. Sunak has a slick operation, ably assisted by a fawning media. However, budgets that are initially well received have a history of unravelling when the devil of the details are revealed, and the cracks are already beginning to show in a budget that does nothing to reduce the gaping inequalities across our communities. The budget report is 100+ pages. You can read it in full here. However, if you don’t have the time to plough through the whole document, below is a bullet point summary of the impact of what is, and isn’t, in the budget. Of course the Chancellor hasn’t been dealt an easy hand, but the cards seems to be stacked in favour of the haves, rather than those as Teresa May said were “just about managing”. This isn’t levelling up the the UK, this is doubling down on inequality. The £20 a week uplift to Universal Credit will end in September, affecting 6m families. This will plunge 500,000 people, including 200,000 children into poverty as we head into winter and when unemployment is expected to peak. The Resolution Foundation stated: “this policy will leave the basic level of benefits at its lowest level since the early 1990’s”. No increase for the 2.5 million people on legacy benefits (those in place before UC was introduced) this will particularly impact people with disabilities. No support for 700,000 households already in rent arrears. The Local Housing Allowance for renters will be frozen from April. Even with the £20 Universal Credit uplift families unable to find work will receive on average £1,600 less per year in social security support than they did in 2011. Families with children will be hit even harder at £2,900 less per year – equivalent to a year’s worth of food shopping for a low income family. Add on to this the further £20 a week cut in UC (£1,040 over a year) this will create serious hardship for many, including those in or out of work. The ‘Stamp Duty Holiday’ extension to June for homes up to £500,000 will primarily benefit higher income households as the average first time buyer property is valued at £225,000. The 95% mortgage guarantee scheme to lenders who offer mortgages to people with just a 5% deposit on homes up to £600,000 will again primarily benefit high income households and is likely to further drive up house prices Council tax is permitted to go up 5% in 2021-22. £16 billion of cuts are planned in public service spending (£12 billion from Autumn spending review and an additional £4 billion in this budget). A freeze on fuel duties (the 11th year in a row) following on from a £14 billion investment in roads announced last Summer, but no mention of continuing or improving the ‘Green Homes Grant’ which seems at odds with the government’s net zero carbon commitment. Due to the Upper Earning National Insurance limit (the point where anything earned above the limit incurs only 2% rather than 12% NI) being frozen at the same level as the higher rate income tax threshold, anyone earning above £50,270 will actually start paying less National Insurance contributions than currently! Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) going up by only 50p a week in April to just £96.35, a real terms cut. The UK has one of the lowest rates of sick pay in Europe. In the clip below Matt Hancock admits he couldn’t live on SSP. https://metro.co.uk/video/matt-hancock-admits-not-able-live-ssp-2134040/?ito=vjs-link No pay rises for our key workers. The National Living Wage will rise by £0.19 to £8.91 an hour for those aged 23 or above, but the inequality will remain as younger people receive lower rates of pay for doing the same work (those aged 18-20 will receive only £6.56 an hour and apprentices only £4.30 an hour). The need for food banks looks set to increase Yet again the Conservative government are looking to bake in inequality, much as they did following the 2008 recession, resulting in devastating impacts on the most vulnerable in our society. The pandemic showed how communities pulled together to provide support for everyone in society. This must be the blueprint for this and future governments. We can’t let down the most vulnerable in our society again. Covid has shown us the value of our low paid key workers. We can and must do better than this, but it’s not going to happen under a Tory government, it never does. Julian Vaughan 4th March 2021 Sources and further reading Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) Budget Analysis https://www.ifs.org.uk/budget-2021 Joseph Rowntree Foundation Budget Analysis https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/jrf-spring-budget-2021-analysis Resolution Foundation Briefing https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/app/uploads/2021/03/Spending-fast-taxing-slow.pdf Budget 2021 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/966160/Budget_2021_Print.pdf

*** Update 5th March 2021 *** Following the publication of this blog Northern have been in touch and have now amended the descriptions of the stations mentioned below. However, a brief look at other stations across the Northern franchise reveals numerous examples of inaccurate information and there remains much to be done across this and other Train Operating Companies to provide accurate information to people with disabilities. In April 2019 to great fanfare the UK rail industry, through the Rail Delivery Group, proudly announced the launch of its interactive accessibility map. The aim of this map was to improve accessibility information for passengers and increase the confidence of passengers with disabilities to travel by train. Further, it also announced the launch of a revolutionary app, due to be fully operational by Summer 2020 which would track rail users with disabilities in real time. However, it soon became clear that there were numerous errors in the information contained within the map, including how stations were identified as fully or partially step-free. For example a station with step-free access to each platform, but no level access between platforms would be highlighted with a green pin, indicating a fully step-free station. This ignores the fact that wheelchair users returning to the station that they set off from will obviously arrive at the opposite platform, and often face two sets of completely inaccessible stairs to get back to where they came from. This is not full accessibility, and for a map which is meant to assist people with disabilities to describe such a station as fully accessible is very poor, and an example of the type of challenges faced by disabled people who want to travel independently on the railway. When this issue was raised with Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) in relation to a number of stations on their Great Northern route, they quickly changed their description to indicate partial access, indicated by a yellow pin, one of the stations being Arlesey in Bedfordshire below. Description change on the Access Map for Arlesey station – note the green yellow and red pins However, what GTR have neglected to mention is the nature of the route, either between the platforms inside the stations (how many steps to negotiate) or the length of the route outside the station from one platform to another. In the case of Arlesey this is a 1.4km journey, much of which is on an unlit main road and involving significant gradients. Some stations will have more accessible routes than this, some will be worse, but this information must be provided so that people with reduced mobility and disabilities can make informed choices. Train Operating Companies can’t act like the world doesn’t exist beyond their ticket barriers. While GTR have at least been proactive in changing some aspects of their station descriptions the same can’t be said for Northern, who seem resolute in refusing to change any ‘fully accessible’ green pin descriptions at their stations. Below are their ‘Access Map’ descriptions of Hexham, Riding Mill and Stocksfield stations, all located on the Tyne Valley Line. Unfortunately, these descriptions fail to mention the following: Hexham – since the problems with their description were first raised they have breezily added “it’s quite a long walk from one side of the station to another, but it is accessible at all times”. This neglects to mention that the route is 660 metres long, crosses three main roads, lacks dropped kerbs and has a stretch with no pavement. As there is no map at the station to indicate this route it could well be a much longer journey if you get lost along the way! Riding Mill – another cheery description of a 10 minute walk between platforms. This is actually 760 metres, unlit along some of its length and with very steep gradients in parts. Stocksfield – the description doesn’t actually say anything about the distance between platform. It is roughly 540 metres, also with an unlit section and no dropped kerbs. Below are the routes for each, highlighted in red. All three of these stations have a green pin denoting full step-free access… (images courtesy of Google Earth) This situation is repeated at many stations across the UK. So where did it all go wrong and how can it be put right? From what I can see and speaking to disabled people and rail industry members there seems to be three main issues. The poor quality of the ‘Knowledgebase’ system that holds information on every station in the UK. The lack of accountability regarding who is actually in charge of ensuring this information is correct and is regularly updated. The ‘tick box’ culture that exists in the rail industry in relation to accessibility. Knowledgebase The Knowledgebase is a static system holding information about facilities at each of the 2500+ stations on the UK rail network. This information is held centrally and is meant to be kept up to date by each of the Train Operating Companies responsible for operating and maintaining their stations. As we can see (and it’s also widely acknowledged by those in the rail industry) the information contained within it is not fit for purpose in relation to accessibility information. Take a look at a description on a station on the clunky National Rail Enquiries (NRE) website and you’ll often see contradictory information, or an absence of necessary details. An example from Ben Rhydding station (Northern again I’m afraid!) below. This station has a green pin on the access map, denoting full step-free access. However, the NRE description can’t quite make up its mind. Ben Rhydding NRE information One bizarre example of a description of the route between two platforms is Acklington station in Northumberland, another station managed by Northern. Now this is one of the least used stations across the UK with less than 500 passengers a year, but all the same there should be a standardised approach to all stations, whatever their footfall. As you will see below the NRE description reassuringly describes the journey between platforms as ‘no problem’ with access via the road bridge and ramp. National Rail Enquiries description of Acklington station The reality is somewhat different. Do we really expect wheelchair users or visually impaired people to negotiate this! No pavement, no lighting – no problem? Northern do redeem themselves slightly by having a hover facility on the larger station map descriptions, which enables you to see a photo of the various facilities available and the potential barriers to travel faced by wheelchair users such as gradients or steps etc. GTR are virtually the only Train Operating Company (TOC) in the UK that hasn’t upgraded their station information to include photos of their stations, despite this deficiency being brought to their attention back in 2019. This means that their passengers have to rely on rather unhelpful 2-D maps of station facilities, not drawn to scale, and without any information about routes between platforms outside of the station limits. Accountability It’s not easy to find this out but the accountability of accessibility info is as follows: National Rail Enquiries website – responsibility of and managed by the Rail Delivery Group (RDG). Stations Made Easy – responsibility of TOC’s, managed by the RDG Access Map – responsibility of the TOC’s managed by the RDG To add to this we also have the Office of Road and Rail (ORR) who have set out station accessibility classifications as set out below: In reality what has happened is that every TOC approaches this issue in a different way so there is no consistency across the network. Some label their stations correctly, many don’t. Some use the ORR classification, some don’t. While great care may be taken in some descriptions, in others it seems clear that the person writing them has never visited the station. There is no evidence of an audit of the information provided, and no reassurance of a date when the information was last updated. Stick the woeful Knowledgebase data into the mix and it’s a recipe for disaster which lets down people with disabilities and those with restricted mobility. The barrow crossing at Hexham station – image courtesy of Patrick Rice I would like to say that I have found a TOC who gets everything right, but I have not and for whatever reason, the Rail Delivery Group do not seem to be able to manage this process, although speaking to individual employees I have found them approachable and helpful. The current approach, with 13 different TOCs doing things their own way, with markedly variable levels of success or seemingly motivation there must be a change. What is definitely 100% RDG’s responsibility is the ‘Passenger Assist App’, announced in 2018, trialed in 2019 and promised to be available to passengers in 2020. From what I understand it is still in testing mode and unlikely to deliver the seamless travel benefits that were promised. ‘Tick box’ Culture I’ve met many people in the rail industry who are committed to improving accessibility across the rail network. However, I still get the general impression of an industry with a tick box approach to accessibility, happy to settle for second best as long as some sort of effort has been made, and a feeling that work is being done almost as a favour, not as a right. Again, this is a culture that must change. How can we fix it? I believe there needs to be a ‘guiding mind’ when dealing with accessibility on the railways. The current division of the task between the Rail Delivery Group, the relevant Train Operating Company, the Department for Transport and the Office of Road and Rail is clearly not working. All parties are looking at each other to complete the tasks, and there seems to be no oversight of checking what is published is actually correct. This really is the easy stuff, if we cannot get this right how are we going to cope with the far more substantial challenges of achieving equal access on the UK railways. I suggest the following 10 point plan as priorities in terms of the provision of accessibility information. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list and I welcome any comments/additions. At stations with no cross platform step-free access, any route/s between platforms that involves leaving the station must be clearly displayed on maps at each exit and also made available online in both map and video run through formats. The length of the route and the steepest gradient encountered on the route must be displayed at each exit to the station and also made available online. The route must be clearly signposted throughout its length. Hazards such as the absence of street lighting or drop kerbs must be mentioned in the description of the route, with the installation of dropped kerbs, lighting etc. requested as a priority with the relevant local authority. When station information is updated the date of the update must be displayed on the map and this information must be checked on a regular basis – and the date of this inspection displayed. The external route must checked for any potential accessibility issues on a regular basis. A standalone body dealing with the provision of accessibility on the railways – perhaps a souped up version of the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee A comprehensive and independent audit of the information contained within ‘Knowledgebase’ – the database that contains station information. For example all photos to be reviewed to check that they are representative of the current layout. This check, of every station, to be completed on a regular basis, no longer than one year apart. A comprehensive and independent review of the ‘Access Map’ discussed above. The Rail Delivery Group and the Train Operating Companies have clearly failed in both their supply of accurate information and management of it. They shouldn’t be allowed to mark their own homework. If level crossings are part of the external route, mandatory inspections to take place in relation to the suitability of the route for a wheelchair, particularly in relation to the flangeway gaps (the gap between the rail and the crossing surface) which have been the cause of a number of fatal and less serious incidents involving wheelchair users across the world. Passing trains on the East Coast Mainline If the government are serious about ‘levelling up’ the UK, a good place would be to start on the railways. The pandemic has changed the world and how we live in it. Hints are already being dropped by senior members of the rail industry that we should expect fewer services. However, this is the time to be bold on public transport as once we have overcome the pandemic, the even greater challenge of climate change awaits us. This isn’t the time to give up the ghost on railways and it mustn’t be the the time to skimp on investment in accessibility. Julian Vaughan 28th February 2021 Links and Sources Access Map: http://accessmap.nationalrail.co.uk/ National Rail Enquiries: https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/default.aspx Rail Delivery Group: https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/about-us.html Office of Rail and Road (Accessible Travel Policy): https://www.orr.gov.uk/guidance-compliance/rail/operator-licences-exemptions/atp Railway technology Magazine – Introducing the new Passenger Assist App: https://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Comment/introducing-the-new-passenger-assist-app #accessibility #accessibilityinformation #stepfreeaccess #UKrail

The current pandemic has presented numerous challenges at a local, national and global level. Whatever you think about the government’s actions in relation to the virus, it has been heartening to see how communities have pulled together and looked out for one another. However, with climate change an even larger crisis looms, and as well as global actions it will again require a coordinated approach at all levels of society and government, both across the UK and Central Bedfordshire. There will be no vaccine for the looming climate disaster and the time to find a cure is fast running out. The 2015 Paris Climate Agreement’s aim is to limit global temperature rise this century to below 2° Centigrade and look to pursue a lower increase of 1.5° Centigrade above pre-industrial levels. As the graph below shows, we have already reached a 1.1°C rise in temperature. While governments across the world have spoken at great length about reducing CO2 emissions and taken the first steps in achieving them, they are some way from getting on the necessary path. The infographic below shows where we are with current policies and where we will be when achieving the current pledges and targets. As you can see, even if we meet our current pledges, we will miss the 2° C target by some distance. Even if the rise was limited to 2° C or less it will have a huge global impact. This warming will not occur equally across the globe, but will be amplified in the polar regions, and this will lead to ice melt and subsequent sea level rise. Once we get to this level of warming then positive feedback loops come into play, such as carbon and methane release from thawing permafrost and the acidification of oceans. I cover this in a previous blog here which sets out the impact of global temperature rises from 1°- 6° C. What seems clear is that we are going to need to exceed targets, rather than just meet them. Wind turbines in Langford, Bedfordshire Where are we now in Central Bedfordshire? Information below is from Central Bedfordshire Council’s (CBC) Baseline Review published in April 2020, CBCs Climate Change Strategy 2010 and the GOV.UK website. Links to these sources are available at the bottom of this blog. It is estimated the Central Bedfordshire area emitted 1.6 million tonnes of CO2 emissions in 2018. In addition to the 23,000 homes already allocated or that have planning permission 20,000 new homes are planned across Central Bedfordshire in the next 20 years. Emissions of CO2 across Central Bedfordshire was estimated at 5.79 tonnes per person in 2018. Population of Central Bedfordshire 289,000 (2019 estimate). 10 Electric Vehicle (EV) charging points have been installed by CBC to date. There are 163,000 cars registered across Central Bedfordshire. 1,283 plug in electric vehicles are registered across Central Bedfordshire. CBC has pledged to support a carbon neutral Central Bedfordshire area by 2030. £46 million is to be spent by CBC on road maintenance and improvements in 2020/21. £6.4 million to be spent by CBC on sustainability/climate action projects in 2020/21. Currently 9% of people across Central Bedfordshire commute by public transport, 2% by cycle and 8% by walking. The council planted 31,268 trees between 2014 and 2019. While the council met its 2015 target of a 35% reduction in their own emissions it failed to meet its 60% target for CO2 emissions reduction by 2020, set in their 2010 Climate Change Strategy. In 2010 CBC had a four year plan to replace all street lights with LEDs. To achieve net zero carbon emissions across the CBC area by 2030 the council would have to reduce carbon emissions by 26.5% a year for the next 10 years and reduce ‘per person’ CO2 emissions from 5.79 tonnes to 0.24 tonnes per year. This figure isn’t zero as the 70,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions will be offset. You can find out more about carbon offsetting here. Central Bedfordshire Council offices at Chicksands How do Central Bedfordshire Council plan to achieve this? Following on from their baseline review completed in April 2020, Central Bedfordshire Council put together a Sustainability Plan which was published in September 2020. You can download the full report here. Firstly, there does seem to be a change in emphasis between the baseline review, which pledges the Council to support both the council and area in becoming carbon neutral by 2030 (stated in the Executive Summary of the Baseline review) and the Sustainability Plan, published only five months later, which appears to aspire to just a 40% reduction in the area’s emissions by 2030. I’m not suggesting that the council ever committed to achieving carbon neutrality across the area by 2030, but it will be actions not words that take us away from the brink of climate disaster. A number of items from their Sustainability Plan stand out. While their aim to plant 1 million trees in the area by 2030 should be applauded, it should be noted that they only planted 31,268 trees between 2014 and 2019. Residential buildings account for 27% of CO2 emissions across Central Bedfordshire, second only to emissions created by road transport (39%). The Future Homes Standard is due to come into force in 2025, committing a 75% reduction in carbon emissions for new homes. However, until that time, under the 2008 Planning and Energy Act, the council are permitted to require compliance with energy efficiency standards that exceed the requirements of building regulations. From what I can see they are only mandating a small 10% reduction in carbon emissions from developers of new homes. This lack of ambition is highlighted in the baseline review, so it seems odd that this target has not been raised. The council must be more ambitious. It should also be noted that it is estimated that 85% of the housing stock across Central Bedfordshire in 2050 will comprise of houses already standing today, so retro-fitting to ensure reductions in carbon emissions will need to take place on a large scale. This will need to be a mixture of local and government spending. Problems with the current ‘Green Homes Grant’ don’t bode well for the future. A bus stop in rural Bedfordshire What is the plan for buses? In short, there is no plan. Look for CBC’s Public Transport Strategy online and you’ll see it’s ‘currently under development’ and has been for a considerable time. In perhaps the most glaring omission from the Sustainability Plan, buses and public transport are almost non-existent in the council’s 10 year plan to reduce carbon emissions. Buses (other than a vague reference to bus shelter provision) only get one mention in the whole document, and even that is a heavily caveated reference to electric buses, involving lobbying for their provision if ‘commercially viable’. While experts in the field of transport (such as the Campaign for Better Transport) press for improved bus services, particularly in rural areas, Central Bedfordshire seems to ignore them entirely. This is a particular concern as road transport accounts for 39% of the area’s total CO2 emissions. Of course buses aren’t the answer on their own, but they should at least form part of the solution. This wouldn’t just be of benefit to the environment, but it will reduce social isolation in what is a rural council area. The baseline review describes how the council currently has very little control over buses in the area. This is true, but this is due to them resolutely refusing to enter into franchising or enhanced partnership working with local private bus operators. You can find out more about these partnerships here. If CBC don’t get involved in partnerships with bus operators they will be unlikely to exert any influence over their switch to low emission buses, or the provision of bus services that benefit the communities across Central Bedfordshire. What this means is that Central Bedfordshire is a virtual desert for buses and has resulted in them failing to be a viable alternative to the car for both commuters and leisure travellers. A cycle route between Langford and Biggleswade What is the role for bikes? Central Bedfordshire Council have an ambitious plan to increase commuting by cycling to 10% by 2023 and 26% by 2030. Considering that the current level of commuting by bike is at 2% and has remained flat since their 2011 Cycling Plan was published, the council will have to invest very quickly in this area. A modal shift from the car to the bike will not occur unless there is a perception that journeys can be made safely and that bikes will be safe when they are stored. CBC have not installed any dedicated (separated from vehicular traffic) cycle lanes in the last 10 years and seem content for muddy bridleways to act as cycle routes. While this may be perfectly adequate for a weekend thrash, it is not suitable for a journey to work. Dedicated cycle lanes will also encourage children to use bikes to and from school, putting in place carbon reduction behaviours at a young age. Unless the council address the issues of safety, suitability and security, their plans for a quarter of commuters to shift to bikes are unlikely to take place. What is the role for Electric Vehicles? Road transport accounts for 39% of Central Bedfordshire’s CO2 emissions. There are 317,000 cars registered in the central Bedfordshire area. Of these 1,283 are plug in electric cars or light goods vehicles. With new cars powered wholly by petrol and diesel being banned from sale in the UK from 2030, there will be a push to environmentally friendlier Electric vehicles (EV’s). However, CBC are aiming to install only 100-150 Charging Points across Central Bedfordshire over the next 10 years. They have drawn this figure from research conducted by a charity which is based on a theoretical town of 100,000 residents. This research estimated that this ‘town’ would require 44 charging points by 2030 and therefore CBC have worked out that proportionally, Central Bedfordshire would need 132 charging points. This totally ignores the fact that Central Bedfordshire cannot be compared to a town, being rural in nature which encourages greater car use, and as previously mentioned already has excessive emissions due to road transport. This target seems extremely unambitious and unlikely to promote the switchover to EVs or satisfy the demand for charging points by 2030. Further, from what I can gather the council are budgeting for 7KW chargers, which are far less efficient in terms of charging speeds than 22KW chargers which cost only a little more and are also eligible for government grants. Slower charging speeds lead to longer charging times and driver tolerance for waiting for an available charger is likely to drop as EV’s are rolled out. Below is a 2018 estimate of installation costs for different categories of charger. I understand that these costs have dropped considerably since then. While different speeds of charger are needed for different scenarios the ‘Plugging the Gap’ report suggests that 85% of chargers should be ‘fast’ i.e. 22KW or quicker. Councils should plan for a mix of speeds of chargers, not just the cheapest option. Table taken from ‘Plugging the Gap: An assessment of future demand for Britain’s EV Public Charging Network (2018) The council shouldn’t rely on the private sector to take up the slack and they should offer incentives such as free or at least cheaper parking for EV users. Currently EV users using CBC EV chargers must also purchase a car parking ticket. Parking may be a ‘cash cow’ for councils, but it won’t encourage a shift towards low emission cars. The infographic below shows the distribution of EV chargers by region as of July 2020. You can see that our region is poorly covered in comparison to others and statistics from the Department for Transport show that the CBC area lags behind even further, at only 13.2 public charging devices per 100,000 people. The nature of EV charging is also likely to change by 2030 as more people take up electric vehicles, including those with no off-street parking facility, and this will further increase demand for public charging points. Taking the above into account, it would appear that CBC’s stated target to install 100-150 chargers underestimates what the requirements will be by 2030 in a rural council area. A lack of chargers, apart from being inconvenient, can lead to ‘range anxiety’ which is a factor in electric vehicle purchases. Conclusion It is clear that a great deal of work has gone into the Sustainability Plan and it provides a template as to how Central Bedfordshire will achieve carbon neutrality. However, the evidence suggests that even if we achieve current planned reductions we will miss the 2° C target and we must strive to achieve even more at a faster rate. This will of course require central as well as local government intervention, but there are additional steps that a local council could take. The pandemic has of course altered our travel patterns and it remains to be seen how long term this impact will be, but the council’s disregard for buses in the area is inexplicable. My view is that CBC must take the opportunities available to enter into partnerships or franchising with local bus operators and services must be provided at a frequency and times at which they become a viable alternative for commuters and leisure users. To encourage an increase in cycling to the levels they are aiming for the council must take steps to make it safe, suitable and secure. The council’s past record on this has been poor and there will need be a very rapid change in their approach otherwise they will miss their 2023 target of 10% of commuters cycling to work. I believe that dedicated cycle lanes must be provided to encourage a shift away from the car; where cycle routes go off road they must be adequately surfaced and well lit, and transport and community hubs at journey ends must have secure storage facilities. The current price of EV’s means that they are beyond the budget of many, but we should expect this to change as technology improves and manufacturers begin to phase out petrol and diesel cars in the lead up to the 2030 ban. CBC’s current plans for publicly available charging points look very unambitious in a region that already has fewer charging points than the rest of the UK. The rural nature of the council area means that residents rely on the car more than in urban areas and the council should provide a mix of charger speeds for differing needs and to encourage the take up of EV vehicles. My view is that CBC should increase the numbers of EV charging points they plan to install across the area, and ensure that they are publicly available in every village and at every community hub across Central Bedfordshire. The looming climate disaster presents many challenges. While it requires a global approach, we all have our part to play. Local councils will be a vital cog in the wheel as we strive to reduce global warming to manageable levels. The transformation required in our day to day lives is considerable, the consequences of not achieving the current targets are grave. Julian Vaughan – 25th February 2021 Sources and further reading: plugging-the-gap-assessment-of-future-demand-for-britains-ev-public-charging-network-2Download climate-strategy_2010Download 20-09-28-sustainability-plan-final-version-ex-ma-20.01.21-1Download 2019.03.20-passivhaus-and-zero-carbon-publication-version1.21Download baseline-review-sustainability-climate-changeDownload

NE Bedfordshire commuters are getting a rough deal as the Department for Transport has failed to react to the radical changes to travel behaviours caused by the pandemic. Below is my email to Richard Fuller MP on how commuters in his constituency are missing out. “As you will be aware the nature of work has changed drastically due to the pandemic and the impact of this is likely to last for a considerable time. I’ve been looking at how the rail industry has reacted to this change in terms of flexible ticketing for key workers who have travel to work at this time, but do so on a part time basis. Further, as we come out of the pandemic it is likely that there will be a blended approach to working between the home and office. Carnet tickets are a flexible option for part-time workers offering a 10% discount on peak and off-peak fares and can be purchased in batches of 10 for the price of 9. You can find more info here: https://www.greatnorthernrail.com/tickets/ticket-types-explained/carnet-tickets Unfortunately, while stations such as Hitchin, St Neots, Bedford, Letchworth and many others in the region benefit from this flexible and money saving carnet ticket option, it is unavailable at any of the stations (Sandy, Biggleswade and Arlesey) that serve your NE Bedfordshire constituency. The reason for this is due to these stations not having barriers and therefore paper carnet tickets would be open to misuse. However, other Train Operating Companies (TOCs) have a ticketing system which permits carnet tickets to be loaded on to Smartcards and therefore carnets can be validated at stations with Smart card validators, which virtually all stations now have. Examples of this are as follows: South Western Railway’s carnet system is explained here: https://www.southwesternrailway.com/train-tickets/ticket-types/carnet Greater Anglia’s system here: https://railplus.greateranglia.co.uk/peak-off-peak-flexipass/flexipass-pk.html and Transport for Wales system here: https://tfwrail.wales/ticket-types/multiflex So it appears that while much of the rest of the region, and indeed the rest of the country, have the benefit of flexible ticketing, our constituency stations of Biggleswade, Sandy and Arlesey are missing out and part-time workers who travel from these stations are getting a rough deal. I would be grateful if you could draw this to the attention of the relevant decision makers in the Department for Transport and press to make sure that this anomaly is corrected as soon as possible. The world of work has changed, perhaps for ever, I’m sure you agree it’s time the DfT moved with the times as we seek to encourage people to move out of their cars and back onto the railway.” Julian Vaughan #Bedfordshire #flexibleworking #publictransport #tickets

I’ve just come out of the latest meeting regarding step-free access at Biggleswade station. The latest developments are as follows: ~ following a previous meeting with our Bedfordshire Rail Access Network team I’m delighted to say that Network Rail have increased the width of the proposed walkway ramp to 2.2 metres (2 metres between hand rails) a 20cm increase compared to the original design and now exceeding rather than just meeting guidance minimums. ~ improvements have also been made to visibility along the ramp structure as well as widening the walkway at the bend prior to the new bridge containing the lifts to each platform ~ a location has been found for accessible toilets/changing places area and this work, while still currently in the design stage, is scheduled for completion by September this year ~ looking at the draft plans the accessible toilets will be sited at the current location of the covered bike rack area which will be replaced by an enlarged bike rack area, situated just to the left of the station entrance. This area will be covered by CCTV. I did request that a secure caged area is provided as bike theft is an ongoing issue. ~ providing there are no spanners put in the works, Network Rail are hopeful of a further acceleration to the project and are aiming for an opening date for the lifts of late Summer 2022. This is a 15 months improvement from the original timescale of Autumn 2023. However, as with many projects, we should be aware that unexpected delays often occur ~ there is still some disagreement about the design of the bus interchange. Unfortunately space is very limited and what is currently proposed is not ideal. However, an integrated transport hub with seamless and step-free access between bus and rail is essential. Biggleswade town centre would benefit greatly from a pedestrianised area where the bus station is located currently. Further, the ongoing discussions about the design of the bus interchange must not delay the installation of lifts at the station. The above improvements highlight the importance of involving people with disabilities from the beginning and during the planning and design stage until completion. Many thanks to my colleagues on the Beds Rail Access team. There is still much to do and we will continue to attend meetings until completion. Do feel free to follow our Bedfordshire Rail Access Network page and get in touch if you have any questions. Julian Vaughan Chair Beds Rail Access Network

It may appear a little dramatic to say that our democracy is under threat. However, if we look at how the UK is run, who holds the power and how that power is checked, I believe there are reasonable grounds on which to be very concerned indeed. Like many others I am guilty of exceptionalism when it comes to my pride in Britain, confident in our renowned sense of fair play and championing of the plucky underdog. Tin-pot dictatorships rule in far away lands and corruption never darkens our sunlit shores. However, scrape away at the veneer of respectability and we find that these issues are much closer to home and the threat to our democracy is a clear and present danger. In very simple terms, government is split into three branches, the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. The executive is the government of the day which enacts the policies passed by the legislature i.e. Parliament, which is elected through the process of General Elections. The judiciary then interprets the law found in Acts of Parliament, the highest court being the Supreme Court. The judiciary cannot overturn primary legislation although it can review whether the government has followed its commitment to the European Convention on Human Rights, established by the Council for Europe following WW2. Again, in simple terms in theory these three branches, although they overlap at various points, should provide the necessary checks and balances to prevent abuse of power. As we will see below it can be argued that the reality is somewhat different. Judicial Review One of the many alarming policies in the Conservative 2019 manifesto was a promise to review the process of judicial review: “…ensuring that it is not abused to conduct politics by other means or to create needless delays”. A judicial review is where someone (the “claimant”) challenges the lawfulness of a central or local government decision or a government body such as a regulator. There are three main grounds for a judicial review: illegality, the decision maker did not have the legal power to make that decision; procedural unfairness, where the decision maker showed bias or representations were unfairly denied; irrationality, where the the decision made was so unreasonable that no reasonable person, acting rationally, would have made it. It is important to note that while a judicial review can quash or overturn a decision it is not a re-run of the merits of the decision and the public body may come to the same decision again, after having followed the correct process. While the Conservative manifesto states that the rights of individuals against an overbearing state will be protected, the terms of reference for the review raise a number of concerns. These include the possibility of: narrowing the grounds for judicial review; reducing the extent of the ‘duty of candour’ which deals with the supply of information to the claimant; limiting the ‘law of standing’ which may stop cases being brought by those not directly affected by the relevant decision. This would impact campaign groups and charities; restricting rights of appeal in judicial review cases; increasing the costs of judicial review proceedings. The issue is covered in greater detail here. We await the ‘Independent Review of Administrative Law’ report, due by the end of the year to find out their recommendations, but any changes in this area have huge potential to reduce the ability of the Courts to keep the Executive in check. It’s clear that the government want change in this area after receiving a bloody nose from the Supreme Court when it found that their five week prorogation of Parliament was unlawful. You can read a summary of the background detail to this case here. European Convention on Human Rights You will be aware that in certain quarters much has been made about the malign influence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the desire to ‘take back control’. However, the origin of these have a much more British flavour than the likes of Nigel Farage would lead you to believe. The ECHR was born out of the ruins of the Second World War to ensure that never again could a national government set off on a path such as 1930’s Germany. The ECHR was drafted by ‘The Council of Europe’ a body that had been called for by Winston Churchill, and was drafted by David Maxwell Fyfe, Churchill’s Solicitor General. The ECHR has nothing to do with the EU and is a treaty between 47 states as opposed to the 28 that form the EU. The UK became a member of the Council for Europe at its inception in 1949, some 24 years before joining the EU. Our rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 The ECHR does not set law in the UK, or any of the other 46 signatories of the convention. It does not have the power to strike down Acts of Parliament which remain sovereign, but makes judgements as to whether laws are incompatible with the conventions. The Conservatives have made clear that they want to remove us from the ECHR and repeal the 1998 Human Rights Act, which was passed by a Labour government and enshrined the ECHR in UK law. The act enables matters to be dealt with by UK Courts rather than Strasbourg. You have to ask yourself which of these protections do they find so objectionable? Who benefits from their removal? The Nolan Principles There was a time when a breach of the law or the ministerial code would have automatically led to a resignation. However, it seems we no longer live in those times and so we have a list of politicians and advisors who have resolutely remained in post (or have been permitted to remain) following incidents from which, if any shred of integrity was still intact, a resignation would have followed. Every time this happens, trust in politicians is further eroded – I realise that we are notching down an already low bar. This matters because we actually do need to have trust and confidence in our politicians, particularly in times of great upheaval such as the current pandemic. What we risk otherwise is the loss of consensus, which we have clearly seen in the public’s approach to the pandemic restrictions since Dominic Cumming’s refusal to resign following his journey to Durham. This refusal to accept the need to resign also normalises a lack of accountability and no doubt sets the tone for those in public office at all levels of government in the UK. This lack of accountability is a threat to democracy as once people have a view that ‘they’re all at it’ it disengages people from politics and discourages them from taking part in the democratic process. The Nolan Principles which apply to anyone who works as a public office holder Voter ID Another threat to the democratic process is Voter ID – a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist and taken straight from the US political playbook of voter suppression. In 2019 there were just 34 allegations of in-person voter fraud out of 58 million votes casts in all elections in that year. 3.5 million people in the UK do not have access to photo ID and 11 million do not have access to a passport or driving licence. There are currently around 1.3 million people in the UK who do not have a bank account. The requirement to present photo ID in order to vote will disproportionately affect the poorest in society – even a free ID card will incur costs through obtaining documentary evidence – BAME communities and people with disabilities. A cynic may say the only purpose of this is to disenfranchise those perceived not to be supporters of the Conservative party. I’d be inclined to agree. Any moves to suppress voting is a threat to our democracy. Social Media The manipulation of our social media is also a serious threat to the democratic process. This issue was exposed by the revealing of the workings of companies such as Cambridge Analytica and their work with social media giants such as Facebook. The issue deserves a blog all of its own (you can see a short summary of the main points here) but what it has resulted in are targetted political adverts to specific individuals, which are not seen by anyone else. This means there is no chance of rebuttal or fact checking. Social media also makes us gravitate to people who think like ‘us’ and this, along with the social media algorithms means that we often only see the views of people who agree with us and this has a tendency to make people’s views more extreme. This promotes a more polarised society, but also weakens the ‘general will’ of the people to be governed under a democratic system. Proportional Representation The UK’s ‘First Past the Post’ (FPTP) voting system means that for many people across the UK voting is just a ritual. This disengages people from politics as their vote is effectively meaningless as “you could stick a red/blue rosette (delete as appropriate) on a pig” in many constituencies across the country and they would still get elected from one General Election to the next. There are two main issues with FTTP. Firstly, the power of each vote isn’t equal and those voters in ‘swing’ seats often hold the key to how an election is won and lost. Drilling down further, the ‘swing voters’ in those seats hold even more power. It is these people that are vulnerable to the dark arts of social media advertising who are sought out with pinpoint accuracy as mass data harvesting and analytics works out our hopes and fears, our ambitions and ultimately, if not our political preferences, at least where we can be nudged to. Secondly, a FTPT system can lead to landslide victories (such as gained by the current UK government) which effectively results in an elective dictatorship. A National Front poster from the 70’s bearing a striking resemblance to current Tory policy While this ‘winner takes all’ system offers a tantalising prize, it is hardly democratic, especially when so many seats can be won with such a small proportion of the national vote. With an 80+ majority it’s not too much of an exaggeration to say that a Premier League footballer such as Marcus Rashford has more influence over government policy than the opposition. A proportional system of voting would mean that each vote has equal value. Proportional Representation (PR) would result in less polarised approach as candidates need to appeal to a broader range of voters to obtain what could be crucial second preference votes. Everyone would have an incentive to vote as everyone’s vote would count and ‘tactical voting’ will end. Read more about the different types of voting systems here. Attacks on the Judiciary Another threat to our democracy are the constant attacks on our judiciary, derided by those in government as ‘lawyer activists’, ‘do-gooders’ or ‘lefty lawyers’ merely for upholding the due process of our UK laws. We end up on a very dangerous slope if we think that the legal process is only for certain groups of people, because you can be sure that once one group has been dealt with, they will move onto another. These attacks hardly follow the principles of the Magna Carta, a document heralded by the far right as the best of British values in which it states: “To no one will we sell, to none deny or delay, right or justice”. A tweet from the Home Office (subsequently deleted) re ‘activist lawyers’ Add to this the continual government attacks on the BBC and Channel 4, both through funding cuts and attacks on its content. For all its faults the BBC remains one of the most trusted institutions in the UK and we should be careful what we wish for before we end up with Fox News and the like, where impartiality is seen as a weakness. More subtle erosions to democracy are being put in place. Allegra Stratton* will lead No.10’s daily televised press briefings. While Johnson claims that it will allow the public more “direct engagement” with the government, the reality is that it will do nothing of the sort. Stratton is an unelected advisor and the coverage of these televised briefings will further divert attention away from Parliament. With Johnson’s continual woeful performances at Prime Minister’s Questions you can understand why he found this idea so attractive, but it reduces the accountability of the Prime Minister. *this plan was scrapped on 20th April with Stratton moved to Johnson’s spokesperson at the COP26 Climate Change summit. Other more sinister attacks on democracy by this Government have come to light only very recently. It has been revealed that Michael Gove has been running a ‘clearing house’ that vets ‘Freedom of Information’ requests, directs officials how to respond to them and would seem to be blacklisting journalists. You can read more about this here. Conclusion Combined, the above changes put forward by the government present a clear threat to the checks and balances of our democracy. In this task they will be aided by a print media happy to peddle hate, lies and a distorted sense of morality. If we allow these changes to happen our country will become more divided, our standing in the world further diminished and our ability to resist government overreach severely weakened. There is much at stake. Labour must be bold and put forward a radical agenda where compassion, accountability and democracy are championed. We must not go back to just being a nicer version of the Conservative Party. Labour should adopt a fairer voting system as a flagship policy in any future manifesto. It is not the answer, but it is a good start. Julian Vaughan 8th December 2020 #proportionalrepresentation #nolanprinciples #voterID #democracy #electivedictatorship #humanrightsact #judicialreview