A tale of two transport stories

LAST week’s Wokingham Today page 7 told the story of how residents in Arborfield Green are feeling helpless.

New families living in Arborfield Green are forced to drive their children to far away schools, although they bought houses in Arborfield Green knowing the development would have a school there for their children to walk to.

One parent, and there may be others, has a child in two different schools meaning very day one of them will be late for school.

Why? Wokingham Borough Council decided to move Farley Hill School lock stock and Barrel into the new school which was built to meet the needs of children in the new 3,500 houses in Arborfield Green.

All of the children who went to Farley Hill will now have a longer car journey to the new school while the children in Arborfield Green, even those living opposite the gates of the new school, have to drive all over the Borough and beyond to get their children educated.

No walking or cycling for anyone. The council is keeping quiet about the old Farley Hill school but I await a planning application for housing in the not too distant future.

This is the same council that is building a new school for special needs children on the side of the M4 and refused to allow Air Quality Monitors to be on site to protect the children and staff.

One resident who challenged the decision to refuse her child was offered an appeal hearing which came with the following words,

“You are entitled to have a friend or advisor with you at the virtual hearing. However, the friend or advisor cannot be a member of the local authority, a member of the admission authority concerned, or a local elected politician. You need to inform us if you wish to have a friend or adviser present and provide us with their e-mail details in order that

they can be sent a calendar invite and instructions”.

So much for democracy.

Moving on to page 23 we see an article from the excellent Cllr Gregor Murray headed The Climate Emergency – Talking Transport.

His article picks up on many key points. In Wokingham almost half of those emissions come from cars and taxis and around 30% of our carbon emissions come from moving around.

To deliver decarbonisation, Gregor also recognises that we have to solve for the root causes of our emissions and that means looking at the reasons why residents and goods are moving around our Borough, and then finding solutions.

He adds, talking to our local business community, removing short and longdistance car commutes from our

roads will go a long way to cutting carbon emissions.

His final paragraph was very telling “There are many benefits of transport decarbonisation. Improved air quality, reduced noise levels, reduced congestion, and more active lifestyles leading to healthier and longer lives. You can help deliver all these benefits by choosing to walk short distances, cycle where you can and work from home is possible”.

How does this square with Wokingham Borough Council approving moving Farley Hill School to Arborfield Green (Garrison).

The result is hundreds of extra car journeys every day when there was no need. It’s not just a pollution generating and time consuming to working parents .

Let’s not forget the building a special need school by a polluting and noisy motorway when a Coroner recently stated that air pollution led to the death of a child. What chance climate emergency and the health of our children.

It beggars belief that a council that promotes Climate Emergency pulls the rug from under the Councillor working so hard to deliver?

Cllr Gary Cowan, Independent Borough Council for Arborfield at Wokingham Borough Council

An open letter to Sir John Redwood

Dear John,

There are only a matter of weeks now until the uplift to Universal

Credit is cruelly removed from millions of people by the Chancellor.

Although the uplift was designed to

be temporary, the difference it has made has been incredible.

There is a huge body of anecdotal evidence to support this. My own local food bank has seen a 75 per cent reduction to the number of single people who require their help since the uplift was introduced.

It is little wonder that hundreds of charitable organisations have been campaigning to stop the cut.

It is now abundantly clear that the standard allowance of Universal Credit was too low before the pandemic and this moment must be seized to right that wrong.

Senior Conservative figures such as the architect of Universal Credit, Sir

Ian Duncan Smith MP, agree and have argued that a failure to do so would prevent the Government from delivering on its manifesto commitments.

‘Building back better’ simply isn’t possible with more of the same. ‘Levelling up’ is a meaningless soundbite without meaningful action.

Increasingly, we hear from the Government benches that ‘work is the best route out of poverty’ when ministers are challenged over the impending cut. But Universal Credit is not an out-ofwork benefit. As many as 40% of the households which rely on Universal Credit are working households.

And over the course of the pandemic, many found themselves jobless for the first time in their adult lives. It was right that Universal Credit was boosted to help them. It would be equally wrong for that extra money to be taken from those who, through no fault of their own, find themselves in a similar position in future.

This is the time for Conservative

MPs to decide whether they will stand by hardworking people, or stand by while millions of families face the choice between eating and heating this winter. Yours sincerely,

David Linden MP, SNP Spokesperson for Work and

Pensions