Ealing Councillor Attacks Hounslow, with response

 

Cllr Dabrowska sent this letter to the Ealing Gazette, which was published on 30th October. I have responded with a refutation of her claims, and hope it will be published in their next edition.

 
Right, Hounslow, time for park action

Oct 29 2009 Ealing Gazette

AS A PASSIONATE Ealing Common Conservative councillor, and as a member of the Gunnersbury Park Regeneration Joint Advisory Board, I am only too aware of the state of the wonderful assets that we share with our neighbouring borough.

Through years of neglect and under-funding, it has come to the point of no return; something must be done.

Whereas Ealing Council has always provided monetary support, our neighbour, Hounslow has not been willing enough to put money where their mouth is.

Looking to the future, I am committed to restoring and improving Gunnersbury Park, but over my dead body will I ever give up any piece of the parkland to developers to help pay for it.

Funds will be found to make sure that this thriving community amenity is restored to its former glory and better!

 COUNCILLOR JOANNA DABROWSKA by email

 

To the Editor

I fear Cllr Dabrowska is misleading your readers when she writes (Right, Hounslow, Time For Park Action, Oct 29 2009): “Whereas Ealing Council has always provided monetary support, our neighbour, Hounslow has not been willing enough to put money where their mouth is.”

There have been many occasions when LB Ealing has unilaterally reduced its support for Gunnersbury Park – for example, its cut of £20,000 in the 2007-8 budget, approved at full Council in January 2007 and confirmed at the Gunnersbury Park Joint Committee meeting of 9th February 2007, with Cllr Dabrowska present. Hounslow then matched the cut, as the joint ownership agreement demanded, and the impact was significant.

Cllr Dabrowska supported holding the public consultation, knowing full well that the research behind it had established that the alternatives to the development proposal were not viable. She also knows that the public has voted in favour of this proposal, and she is now desperately attempting to lay the blame for past (and probably future) failure onto Hounslow.

By destroying what cooperation there has between the two councils, Cllr Dabrowska and her colleagues are consigning Gunnersbury Park to further decay.

 
James Wisdom

Chair, Friends of Gunnersbury Park and Museum

1 November 2009

 

 

Comments

Dear Mr Wisdom,

I fear you are missing the point in all the recent events surrounding Gunnersbury Park. The Gunnersbury Park Survey was a sham and therefore the results cannot be relied upon as a basis for effective decision making.

Mori pollsters will tell you that the outcome of any survey is strongly influenced by how the questions are phrased. Do you really believe that residents and park users would have said yes to the question “Do you support the building of housing on 5.6 acres of the park and the felling of 400 hundred trees in the process”? Would the Friends of Gunnersbury say yes to this question? This clear question was not put to us as a single item. The phraseology of this question also shows you that if I present it to residents concerned about preserving our parks, I am likely to get a yes answer. The problem is the Survey was phrased and designed in a way that would give what seems like a pre-determined result in favour of selling off the land for housing. Fortunately, a significant minority of respondents saw through this deception.

When I met Cllr Phillip Taylor, referred to in my blog, he did admit the survey was not perfect and I can only guess that with pressure from STIG and the Ealing Green Party the Tory majority at LB Ealing felt it necessary to support the motion preventing residential building on the park. They clearly misjudge the strength of feeling for our parks and have had to make, what is perceived, as an embarrassing up-turn.

Confused as I am about the political intrigues behind all of this, can you explain how being a “Friend of Gunnersbury Park” is compatible with supporting the sale of part of the park to developers?

conradbryan on 13th November 2009 at 14:52 PM

REVISED

Dear Mr Wisdom,

I fear you are missing the point in all the recent events surrounding Gunnersbury Park. The Gunnersbury Park Survey was a sham and therefore the results cannot be relied upon as a basis for effective decision making.

Mori pollsters will tell you that the outcome of any survey is strongly influenced by how the questions are phrased. Do you really believe that residents and park users would have said yes to the question “Do you support the building of housing on 5.6 acres of the park and the felling of 400 hundred trees in the process”? Would the Friends of Gunnersbury say yes to this question? This clear question was not put to us as a single item. The phraseology of this question also shows you that if I present it to residents concerned about preserving our parks, I am likely to get a NO answer. The problem is the Survey was phrased and designed in a way that would give what seems like a pre-determined result in favour of selling off the land for housing. Fortunately, a significant minority of respondents saw through this deception.

When I met Cllr Phillip Taylor, referred to in my blog, he did admit the survey was not perfect and I can only guess that with pressure from STIG and the Ealing Green Party the Tory majority at LB Ealing felt it necessary to support the motion preventing residential building on the park. They clearly misjudge the strength of feeling for our parks and have had to make, what is perceived, as an embarrassing up-turn.

Confused as I am about the political intrigues behind all of this, can you explain how being a “Friend of Gunnersbury Park” is compatible with supporting the sale of part of the park to developers?

conradbryan on 13th November 2009 at 15:24 PM