Bootle Bosses Ignore Southport and Will Paint Lord Street Black, Regardless

Bootle Bosses Ignore Southport and Will Paint Lord Street Black, Regardless

Bootle Labour Bosses have shown once again that they are essentially an ‘occupying power’ in Southport, unwilling to listen at all to representations from Southport people, Southport businesses and their elected representatives.

At last night’s Sefton Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee, held in Bootle Town Hall, called to reconsider the decision to urgently lay down a new black surface from end to end of Lord Street, the Labour majority refused to listen to detailed concerns from Southport councillors about issues of conservation and matters affecting businesses and shoppers in the town.  They declared that the only matter they would consider was the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) closing the road. The TRO was the only published decision of the Cabinet member – the timing of the work and the replacement of the historic red tarmac of Lord Street by standard black was carried out in private and not even registered formally.

After the meeting, Southport Town Centre councillor Tony Dawson, who had written to each of the Scrutiny Committee members prior to their deliberations, supporting the reconsideration, said:

“It was, of course, the REASON FOR the issuing of the Order which had been being ‘called in’, rather than the issue of the Order itself. But the Bootle ‘occupiers’ decided to use procedural tricks to stop a serious matter affecting Southport from being discussed sensibly.”

“Clearly, Lord Street, Southport, has to be repaired and sometimes renewed. But this is not just a highways issue. Lord Street’s traditional red surfacing is, and has been for many years, an inherent characteristic of the area which is the centre of a Sefton Borough conservation area. So, in addition to the issues affecting the local economy of Southport there were straightforward conservation issues which had clearly been totally overlooked in making the decision. The Council has a responsibility to both consider and consult on conservation issues before making decisions.

Sefton Council’s own draft Lord Street Conservation Area Appraisal, presently out to consultation, says:

“10.12 SURFACING AND STREET FURNITURE

The general appearance of the area would benefit from the rationalisation of traffic signs and street furniture. A streetscape audit would help identify where features are redundant or unnecessary allowing these to be removed or combined. It would be beneficial for the various Council services with responsibility for the streetscape to work together with the conservation team to develop a code of practice in relation to street surfacing and street furniture within the town centre, recognising that the architectural value and commercial importance of the area warrants special attention. This would help ensure that future work in the Conservation Area is properly co-ordinated and respects the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.”

It is quite clear that such ‘working together’ has not occurred in this matter, to date. We can see that the Borough of Sefton is saying one thing in its current consultation document and doing precisely the opposite within the highways department.

Although the state of the surface of Lord Street is not particularly good at the moment along its whole length, it is not in such a state as to require immediate work ‘in emergency’. Clearly the timing of any such work is critical to the economy of the traders of Southport town centre.

The issue of whether or not the red tarmac should be retained has both cost and conservation aspects and these should both be properly be consulted and discussed with the people of Southport and their elected representatives including, though not exclusively, through the Southport Area Committee. The Southport Civic Society and Southport BID are clearly important interested parties to such decisions. The manner in which bus services are re-directed during the work – and how this redirection relates to the phasing of work – are also matters which affect many elderly residents as well as the traders who rely upon their custom.”

“As a councillor for the ward which includes the entirety of Lord Street, I am appalled that the conservation and economic impact issues here have not yet been consulted with the people of Southport and our community and local bodies.”

“The manner in which this decision has been taken and proper scrutiny refused is far wider than the Lord Street issue. It shows that we in Southport live under the jack boot of an ‘elected dictatorship’. This is a matter that urgently needs Parliamentary and government  consideration.”