.jpg)
Southend Confelicity Meeting 10.11.22
Date: Thursday 10th November, 2022
Present:
James Miller, Melissa Aylott, Jonathan Humphrys, Brian Ayling, Terry Coxall, Simon Jones, Rob Cammidge, Linzi Arkas-Binder, Michael Arkas Binder, Dee Curtis and Kevin Waller.
Apologies for Absence:
Lee Clarke, Connor Bines, Kayleigh Burgess, Nicky Gilbert, Deano Harris-Ecketta and Emma Dodson.
Welcome
James welcomed 2 new members to the party, Terry and Rob.
1. Motions for the Manifesto 2023 1.1 Do you support the Council’s proposal to move from the Civic Centre to the Victoria?
Discussion
Bryan - Can see why but does not see why we should waste the money. Also mentioned that the job centre should not be in the centre of town! Terry - Slightly against, would like it to remain the centre of the shopping centre. Melissa - Completely against. Feel the centre is a part of the town and to leave it as such. The office could be anywhere so why take such a key space. The current location, I feel, is in a good location next to the court and police station. Also, the parking should not be free for council workers. Simon - Would not be against the walk in services going into Victoria to help the people needing these services. Other than that, no. Against the move but better access to services would be beneficial. Also raised that it is easy to access, next to 2 car parks, a walk from the train station and bus stop. Rob - Why change it! Jon - Mentioned that it may bring the people into the town (if the services are there). ‘The devil is in the detail’. Could also bring footfall of the employees into the town. The key question is to know how much space they are wanting to use.
Voting
1. Brian: 40 (No for now)
2. Terry: 49 (No for now)
3. Melissa: 1 (No for now)
4. Simon: 60 (Yes, but needs more information)
5. Rob: 1 (No for now)
6. Jon: 60 (Yes, but needs more information)
7. James: 49 (No for now)
33% support moving the council offices from the Civic Centre to the Victoria Shopping Centre
37% mean average indicating the strength of feeling towards the move is weak.
Although the overall consensus was inconclusive, the group would look forward to hearing the details of the proposed move.
Bryan - Only happy if they are safe and supervised. However, as they are not, would be pro banning. Would encourage more police to ensure they are safe. Jon - Little bit with Bryan. They are nice and organisations may want them for celebrations. This would need to be done properly. For families, this is difficult as is hard to manage. For private I feel the risks outweigh the benefits. Simon – Doesn’t like glass on the beach. Need it to be controlled, would need to have a bit to disposal. Rob - takes away from local businesses. Pro banning them. It encourages litter on the beach. Melissa - looked at what Brighton does and it seems to work with their Dos and Don’ts. As long as people are safe and dispose of safely I am happy. Even without dos and don’ts I do not feel they should be banned. Terry - only to ban as certain times.
All agreed not to ban them and follow a similar model to Brighton, which might include:
- Only light BBQs after 6pm
- Only reusable BBQs permitted
- Raise BBQs above the stones
- Put cold water when finished
- Dispose of coals in yellow basket when finished
Voting
1. Brian: 100 (Yes)
2. Terry: 100 (Yes)
3. Melissa: 100 (Yes)
4. Simon: 100 (Yes)
5. Rob: 100 (Yes)
6. Jon: 100 (Yes)
7. James: 100 (Yes)
The policy to oppose the ban on BBQs on the beach was agreed with the caveat that the Brighton model is followed. This will be written up for agreement on the next meeting. Once agreed, this will form part of the manifesto.
It was decided that as Dee was not available at this time, the discussion and vote would be taken on the next meeting. 1.4 Do you support a section of the beach for Dog Walking? It was suggested that this had already been approved by the council, but as yet, no information on the council website. Currently the website states that dogs are only permitted between 1st October to 30th April.
Michael and Linzi joined the meeting. 1.5 Do you support the £575m Queensway project? Discussion
Bryan - socialist proposal! Want to destroy the flats and get new ones. Michael - benefits to Paul’s Discount as many passers by will see the sign and the shop. There will be a lot of distribution. Like the plans but not to do the underpass. Jon - need a positive in what we would like in place if not the Queensway. James - we do not like the underpass changing. Pro developing the area but no for now. Explained that the developers were in disarray and at this stage would start the process from scratch. Terry - agree the area needs development but not at the moment, money can be spent elsewhere. Linzi - very against the rush of the plans.
Rob - against getting rid of the underpass. Look into the re-tendering of the project as many issues with the current.
Vote:
There was no scored vote taken, however, all supported the idea of the Queensway, aside from the underpass being filled in, but agreed that the project should be halted and started again due to the turmoil involving the development companies.
A policy will be written for the next meeting. Once agreed this will form part of the manifesto. 1.6 Do you support a public consultation to reinstate the road through the high street? Jon - not a bad idea but not on the manifesto Rob - like it and used the example Leigh. Do not like the current way of the Southend roads Terry - encourages people onto the pavement and into the shops. Linzi - need more decent shops first. Pro a consultation. Melissa - why not give it a go, cannot get any worse
Michael - no with the current shops. Not against.
Vote:
1. Brian: 100 (Yes)
2. Terry: 100 (Yes)
3. Melissa: 100 (Yes)
4. Simon: 100 (Yes)
5. Rob: 100 (Yes)
6. Jon: 100 (Yes)
7. James: 100 (Yes)
8. Kevin 100 (Yes)
9. Dee – 100 (Yes)
Although all agreed for the consultation, Jon did not want it to go onto the manifesto. For this reason, it currently will not be on there.
1. Brian: 1 (No for now)
2. Terry: 1 (No for now)
3. Melissa: 1 (No for now)
4. Simon: 1 (No for now)
5. Rob: 1 (No for now)
6. Jon: 1 (No for now)
7. James: 1 (No for now)
8. Kevin 1 (No for now)
9. Dee – 1 (No for now)
10. Linzi – 1 (No for now)
11. Michael 1 (No for now)
All agreed against. A policy will be written and it will be included in the manifesto. 1.8 Do you support the Southend Cricket Pavilion being rebuilt? Discussion
Dee - yes - wants it to stay and provide an asset to the community. Suggest we contact the council to prolong the demolition of the building. Bryan will take it on! Community asset trust.
James – the council are saying it will cost £600K to build a new pavilion. Where did they get that figure from? On the basis that the cost is reviewed it should be re-built – it is the home of Southend cricket! Suggestion: aims to protect community asset trusts (in next meeting)
Vote:
1. Brian: 100 (Yes)
2. Terry: 100 (Yes)
3. Melissa: 100 (Yes)
4. Simon: 100 (Yes)
5. Rob: 100 (Yes)
6. Jon: 100 (Yes)
7. James: 100 (Yes)
8. Kevin 100 (Yes)
9. Dee – 100 (Yes)
10. Linzi – 100 (Yes)
11. Michael – 100 (Yes)
All were in favour of re-building the Southend Cricket Pavilion. A policy will be written, and once agreed, will go into the manifesto.
1.9 Do you support separating the cycle lanes on the seafront to have lanes on each side of the road? All agreed that we should not have the cycling lanes next to car parking at the risk of doors open on them. Discussed the idea of different rules on who can use the lanes based on their speeds, but would be difficult to maintain. Needs more discussion.
Action:
- Jon to review the council’s current cycle lane policy.
2. Candidates Terry and Simon have put themselves forward to stand as candidates in the 2023 election.
Simon is now the official candidate in Prittlewell taking over from Lizzie Smith.
Discussion on Terry’s ward will continue.
This will bring candidate numbers up to 13.
The Pier is to be on the discussion at the next meeting. However, all were enthusiastic about Terry’s idea of exploring putting a stationary cruise liner at the end of the Pier. 4. Addendum
On the previous meeting it was agreed to use Metro Bank for the party’s bank account. They turned us down on the basis they would not support any political parties.
Instead, we will be opening an account with the Coop and the application has already gone in. We have been informed it could take up to 12 weeks.
A further £80 was spent on leaflets.
It was agreed that all meetings should be filmed and published in line with the party constitution. Emma will publish the footage of the previous meeting, however, Emma was unable to attend this meeting so recording did not take place.
Josephine Meville, who attended a previous Confelicity meeting has recently passed. We send our deepest condolences to her family. She was a community-minded person with great ambition, as her successful East Beach summer festival proved.
May she rest in peace.