Subject: News

Bulletin from Greg Hands M.P. #326 Date: Thursday, 2 February 2012 23:08:44 United Kingdom Time From: To: Greg Hands M.P. news@greghands.com

In this edition:
Greg Hands M.P.s Diary Website of the Week: www.stopthesewer.com Monitor crime on your street at police.uk Super sewer human cost too high says H&F Council Excellent GCSE results for K&C schools Parking boost for H&F residents Exhibition Road open for business Community Planning Event for Fulham Riverside Hands in the papers: Parents apply to launch Hammersmith and Fulham's third free school Hands in the papers: Vote Ken and Bob Crow will get keys to capitals transport system Greg Hands M.P.s response to the phase two Thames Tunnel consultation How to contact Greg Hands M.P.

Issue 326 Thursday 2nd February 2012

Since the last edition, Greg:

Met representatives of the campaign group Stop the Sewer, which campaigns to stop the Super Sewer coming to Fulham, together with LBH&F Deputy Leader, Cllr. Nicholas Botterill. Together with local Chelsea residents representatives, met Government Minister Baroness Hanham to explore actions the Government might take to better combat the rapid proliferation of subterranean development in the two Boroughs. Chaired a meeting with the Prime Minister and London MPs to discuss the campaign to re-elect Boris Johnson as Mayor of London. Voted for the Welfare Reform Bill and for the Governments 26,000 Benefit Cap. Hammersmiths Labour MP voted to carry on with annual benefit bills of more than 26,000 per annum, paid for by hard-working local people. Attended the Annual General Meeting of the Conservative Friends of Poland in the House of Commons. Greg is the Chairman of the Parliamentary Group. Welcomed a visiting delegation of Government and Opposition parliamentary whips from both Ghana and Kenya, through the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. Led teams of MPs in Chelsea and Fulham campaign sessions for London Mayor Boris Johnson. To get involved in the campaign, see www.backboris2012.com. Welcomed World End Residents Association (WERA) Chairman John Rendall to the House of Commons to discuss the state and issues affecting it. Hosted a meeting of the Serbian City Club for a showing of the new film Gde cveta limun zut in the House of Commons. Had a full schedule of activity as a Government Whip in and around the chamber of the House of Commons, including ministerial meetings and organising votes and standing committees. Held a weekly surgery for Chelsea and Fulham residents at Fulham Town Hall. Gregs surgeries are held generally every Monday at either Fulham Town Hall or at Peter Jones, Sloane Square. To ask for an appointment, email mail@greghands.com or call 020 7219 5448.

Website of the Week:

www.stopthesewer.com
The website of the residents campaign to stop the Super Sewer, or Thames Tideway Tunnel, coming to Fulham. The consultation closes on 10th February. Gregs submission is in this bulletin.

Monitor crime on your street at police.uk

Greg Hands M.P. has welcomed upgrades to the police.uk website. A series of improvements are giving the public an even more detailed picture of crime and anti-social behaviour in our local streets. The website now records all incidents of crime and antisocial behaviour at train stations and on railway networks. Incidents occurring at or near significant local sites like shopping areas, nightclubs, parks, airports, universities, car parks and hospitals will be added in the coming months. In addition, the police.uk website now has more detail on the precise location of incidents, while still protecting anonymity. From May, it will also show the action taken by the police or the justice system after a crime. Commenting, Greg Hands M.P. said: Police.uk allows everyone to see what is happening right on their street. Its already received an astonishing 453 million hits in the year since its launch, and keeps getting better. The Government is listening to the public demand for more information on crime in their neighbourhood. Its also a good reminder of how crime in London has fallen under Boris. There are 1,000 more police on Londons streets than was the case under Ken Livingstone.Police.uk lets you see the work they do and hold them to account.

Super sewer human cost too high says H&F Council

The human cost of Thames Waters super sewer plans for south Fulham will be too high and too much to bear if they are not reversed, according to the local council. In a stark warning Hammersmith & Fulham (H&F) Councils Deputy Leader, Cllr Nick Botterill, has spoken out against Thames Waters plans to dump the main west London drive shaft on the tight-knit residential community around Carnwath Road. Warning that the elderly, vulnerable and the young will be the hardest hit by the major construction site which will be the size of six football pitches Cllr Botterill urged residents to respond to Thames Waters consultation before it closes on Feb 10. He said: We are approaching D-Day for the super sewer and if residents do not make their voices heard now we could all be facing a decade of construction misery. 10 minutes of your time now, spent responding to Thames Water, could stop 10 years of super sewer hell for the whole of Fulham. The warning comes as a local head teacher and local mums also voiced their fears for children in SW6. In a dramatic u-turn in November 2011 Thames Water named the Fulham riverside as their new preferred site for their controversial 4.1billion concrete tunnel after originally naming a patch of open space in Barn Elms, Richmond. The bombshell stunned Fulham residents in the tight knit residential community. The change of heart from Thames Water bosses gave the council and local people just 14 weeks to mount a challenge and prompted accusations that the consultation form was deliberately over complicated and asked leading questions. The Mayor of London, backed by the council, called for the consultation to be extended but Thames Water ignored the pleas. The devastating sewer proposals would see south Fulham homes blighted, roads congested and school children and vulnerable residents all at risk from noxious fumes, according to the council. At least five local schools are all within a mile of the residential site. Annette Dobson, Headmistress of Thomas' School on Estcourt Road, said: Even the youngest pupil in my school, and they start aged four years old, is intelligent enough to know that the preferred choice for a main drive shaft for this massive engineering project cannot be here at Carnwath Road. The proposed site is adjacent to people's homes, near children's schools, on top of peoples places of work and alongside an already congested road. It is plain and simple madness. The council is formally responding to Thames Waters phase 2 consultation to argue that Carnwath Road is a completely unacceptable site as: Light, noise and vibration pollution associated with the major construction site will last for a minimum of 24 hours a day, seven days a week for at least six years the length of a childs primary education The 29,000 lorries needed at the site will endanger elderly and vulnerable pedestrians and the thousands of children who attend schools in the area. The local road network will not be able to cope without significant improvements 75 existing jobs and six businesses will be displaced for no regeneration gain The regeneration proposals that residents, community groups and the Princes Foundation helped shape will be blighted for at least 10 years Plans to reopen the Thames path along the river will be lost for a decade or more The 50ft ventilation tower for noxious fumes will permanently scar the riverfront Many of the 15,000 homes and 2,000 businesses located within 2,000 yards of the proposed site will suffer from dampened property values The super sewer will not solve a single basement flooding problem

Friston Street resident Tara Anne says: As a mother of two children who attend a school just yards from the site and who also play in South Park which is just two blocks away, I am very concerned about the impact this proposal will have on their health and the health of all children in the area. Scientific studies have shown that children are more affected by pollution than adults and I cannot imagine a worse choice for a major construction project that is going to go on for at least six years which is a school child's entire primary school education. There has to be a better solution to the problem. A cleaner Thames is a noble goal but are we willing to sacrifice our children's health to attain it? I would say no. Meanwhile, as part of the councils draft supplementary planning document which outlines how the south Fulham riverside could be regenerated the local community has been helping to help shape a vision to transform the area from its industrial past into a new residential mixed use area. In a series of workshops, which were co-ordinated by the Princes Foundation, local residents were able to put forward their views on the future regeneration of the area. There was overwhelming support for a mixed use scheme including the desire to provide better access to the Thames Path, high quality urban design and a renewed focus on the river. There is a second round of public consultation with the Princes Foundation due next week. Cllr Botterill says: To add insult to injury, local residents and community groups have invested considerable time and effort into shaping the future regeneration proposals for the south Fulham riverside and will strongly oppose the derailment of the proposals at this late stage by Thames Waters controversial super sewer. The densely packed residential area around Fulham riverside is not suitable for the main super sewer drive shaft, and school children and vulnerable residents should not be put at risk to boost profits for Australian bankers especially when there are far less disruptive options available. The Princes Foundation is running two public drop-in sessions about the possible future of the south Fulham riverside (if the super sewer is rejected) on: Monday, February 6, 6:30-8:30pm at Hurlingham & Chelsea School Wednesday, February 8, 6:30-8:30pm at Hurlingham & Chelsea School

Chief Executive of the Princes Foundation, Hank Dittmar said: This is an opportunity for real community engagement and to develop a shared vision for the future of this important river site. We will be inviting a range of local stakeholders and experts to work with us to create this vision. In a separate development local authority engineers say that the sewer construction site that Thames Water has earmarked for Kirtling Street, in Wandsworth, could be expanded instead of using Carnwath Road. To respond to Thames Waters consultation click here. Or, fill out the simplified consultation form, as prepared by residents, which is available at www.stopthesewer.com. To find out more about the Princes Foundation please visit: www.princes-foundation.org.

Excellent GCSE results for K&C schools

GCSE exam results in Kensington and Chelsea are the second best in the country according to tables published last week (Thursday 26th January) by the Department for Education. The table shows that 73 per cent of GCSE students in the borough's schools get 5+ A* to C GCSE's including English and mathematics. The results also mean that the borough is ranked number one in inner London. Commenting on the tables, Councillor Elizabeth Campbell, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea's Cabinet Member for Education, said: "I am very pleased to see our schools maintaining their excellent standards and would like to thank all the staff who work so hard to deliver such good results." The borough is also ranked top nationally for students making the expected level of progress in English since Key Stage 2 and fifth for students making the expected level of progress in mathematics since Key Stage 2.

Parking boost for H&F residents

Parking charges are set to be frozen and the 200th new parking bay opened in a package of measures to help hard-pressed motorists. Hammersmith & Fulham (H&F) Council has pledged to freeze borough-wide parking permits and pay and display charges and will create around 20 new parking spaces, around Loftus Road, meaning the borough has 200 extra parking bays than it did in 2007. It will be the fourth year out of five that parking charges have been frozen by the council, if the move is formally agreed at a budget council meeting later this month. The standard price for an hour's pay and display parking in H&F is set to stay at 2.20, while in town centres where parking is at a premium it will remain at 2.80. H&Fs prices are among the lowest in inner London and are significantly lower than Camden (4.90) and Lambeth (4.20). The H&F residents parking permit is set to remain 181 cheaper than the most expensive borough which is Islington (300). The council is also set to create its 200th additional parking bay since 2007 in a move to ease parking congestion in Britains fourth smallest borough. The plans to freeze charges and create more bays comes on top of other driver friendly initiatives delivered by the council over recent years. These include: Building a new slip road on Fulham Palace Road in record time, which is already reducing congestion by letting an extra 200 vehicles an hour through the busy junction Successfully piloting four new car club bays in 2011 and plans for 100 more over the next two years Successfully campaigning to scrap of the Western Extension of the Congestion Charge Zone Creating new 20 pence 'stop and shop' bays in Askew Road, Goldhawk Road and Fulham Road to encourage more shoppers to the area, with plans for more of these discounted bays in North End Road and around Wandsworth Bridge Road Introduction of a successful match day only parking scheme near Fulham Football Club Residents' visitors discounted parking in around half the borough, which the council hopes to expand borough-wide Simpler, easier to read, road signs.

Cllr Nick Botterill, H&F Council Deputy Leader, said: These are tough times economically and the cost of living continues to rise for us all. In recognition of this the council has pledge to cut council tax for the fifth year out of six and we are also bringing forward a package of measures to help motorists. We are making sure motorists get a fair deal by not increasing our parking permits or pay and display charges and we are opening our 200th new parking bay, since 2007, next month. The announcement follows the councils successful Get Moving campaign, which was launched last year, where councillors and council officers spoke to local residents about their transport issues that they want to see change. Despite being only four miles in length from the top to the bottom of the borough, H&F has around 180,000 residents with thousands of workers and commuters travelling on its roads every day. Cllr Botterill said: We know from speaking to residents that parking and traffic jams are two of the biggest problems that motorists face in our small, densely packed, borough. We are tackling these issues head on by introducing a package of driver friendly measures including keeping parking costs down, creating new parking bays and building a slip-road at one of our most congested junctions. To have your say visit www.lbhf.gov.uk/getmoving.

Exhibition Road open for business

After three years of meticulous construction work Exhibition Road is being opened officially on Wednesday 1st February) by the Mayor of London and the leaders of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and the City of Westminster. The new-look road features a kerb-free single surface with no barriers or street clutter. Visual and tactile lines distinguish pedestrian areas from those used by vehicles. Cars are slowed by a 20mph speed limit. A stunning chequered granite design runs from South Kensington Station to Hyde Park along the full width of the road from building to building. Kerbs, barriers and street clutter have been removed improving access, particularly for those using wheelchairs, push chairs and motorised buggies. Pedestrians can now walk from South Kensington Station to Hyde Park along a newly created shared space. Black cast iron drainage channel covers run along each side of Exhibition Road, about four metres out from the respective building lines. Beside the drainage channels, strips of `corduroy' tactile warn blind and partially sighted people that they are moving into or out of vehicle free areas. Tall, sleek street lighting masts have been designed to complement the grand buildings of Exhibition Road. The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, said: "Like the many other improvements we are making to London's great outdoors it is projects like these that are not just creating fantastic new places to enjoy but which are supporting and delivering many jobs across the capital. "This clever approach to rearranging the streetscape at the heart of one of the most important cultural and academic corners on the planet will heighten the whole experience for visitors. In particular it will make it much easier and even more pleasurable for families visiting these unique attractions with space to wander unhindered in an area that puts people first." Councillor Sir Merrick Cockell, Leader of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, said: "It has taken us the best part of ten years to get here but South Kensington and Exhibition Road finally have the setting they deserve. "For 2012 and far beyond, London now has a unique streetscape that will delight our many millions of visitors and which sets a new standard for urban design." Councillor Daniel Moylan, Deputy Chairman of Transport for London (TfL), said: "The improvements made to this cultural heartland of the Capital are exactly what the Mayor of London's Great Outdoors programme is seeking to achieve. "The reimagining of the space has transformed Exhibition Road, improving the quality of life for people living and working in, and for those visiting, the area. In addition, the uplift in local retail has helped nearby business and dramatically improved the pedestrian experience. "It is a great example of how TfL and the boroughs are contributing to transform the streets and public spaces in the Capital in advance of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games." Leader of Westminster Council, Cllr Colin Barrow, added: "The project at Exhibition Road has made a dramatic impact on the South Kensington streetscape and we are delighted to see the successful completion of these improvements. The streamlined streetscape ensures that the area is at its best for the millions of visitors each year and fits in well with our own streetscape improvements across the City of Westminster." Arunima Misra, Ambassador for Whizz-Kidz and a wheelchair-using Londoner, said: "It's fantastic to be involved in supporting Exhibition Road to become a more accessible space. "Disabled Londoners and tourists want to enjoy the museums and activities along this historic part of the City, just the same as nondisabled visitors. As a wheelchair-user, and Ambassador for WhizzKidz, I am passionate about ensuring disabled people have equal freedom of mobility to get around London. "In the year that London hosts the Paralympic 2012 games it is all the more important we set a high standard for accessibility."

Community Planning Event for Fulham Riverside

Established in 1998 by HRH The Prince of Wales, The Princes Foundation for Building Community is an educational charity which promotes community engagement in the planning process. They have been invited by Friends of South Park and other residents to facilitate a community planning exercise in response to a pending planning application at Whiffen Wharf, Hurlingham Wharf, and Carnwath Road Industrial Estate. It is an opportunity to develop a shared vision for the future of this important river site, currently threatened by the Super Sewer, and they will facilitate two public sessions: 6th February 18:30 20:30, Hurlingham & Chelsea School 8th February 18:30 20:30, Hurlingham & Chelsea School

The first session will be used to explain the process, to present the masterplan ideas, and to enable the community to explain their thoughts and aspirations. The second session will provide an opportunity for The Princes Foundation to present back the outcomes of a stakeholder workshop. All members of the community are welcome to attend these two sessions.

Hands in the papers:

Parents apply to launch Hammersmith and Fulham's third free school

Adam Courtney, Hammersmith & Fulham Chronicle Tuesday 31st January 2012 A group of parents from Fulham want to open the borough's third free school. The band of 12 will submit an application to the Secretary of State for Education next month. The new venture would be called the Fulham Boys' School and would be set within a framework of 'strong Christian values'. It would become the third such venture in Hammersmith and Fulham, joining ARK Conway and the West London Free School, and aims to open for year 7 pupils in September 2013. The group, led by Fulham parents Alex Wade and Jonny Ambrose, first made its application last year but were told to come back with revised plans. They believe there is a market for Christian secondary school in the area, having canvassed opinion from parents of children at primary schools including All Saints, St John's and Queen's Manor. Group chairman Mr Wade, who lives in Felden Street, said: "From speaking to parents locally, it is clear theres very real demand for more choice at secondary level, for boys in particular. "Fulham hasnt got a secondary faith school for boys, other than the excellent but heavily oversubscribed Oratory School, and our ambition is to fill this gap with an outstanding school, with inspirational teaching planned specifically to bring out the best in boys." While the plans are for a Church of England school, organisers are actively encouraging support from across the community. Their vision is for an inclusive school with at least half of the places each year open to applicants of all faiths and none. Mr Ambrose said: "We know the funding for new free schools is tough, and while were confident in the strength of our proposals we are going to need your support to persuade the Department of Education that a Church of England boys secondary school is needed and will have a positive effect locally." Fulham MP Greg Hands has backed the group. He said: "I was elected MP for Fulham in 2005 on a platform of creating more secondary school choice, and I have given this proposal for a new Fulham Boys School my wholehearted support. "We have some excellent new schools locally, but there is a pressing need for a high quality boys Church of England secondary. I urge all residents from SW6 and beyond to register their support." * To find out more visit www.fulhamboysschool.org.

Hands in the papers:

Vote Ken and Bob Crow will get keys to capitals transport system
Peter Dominiczak, Evening Standard Tuesday 31st January 2012 Union baron Bob Crow will be "handed the keys" to the transport network if Ken Livingstone is elected Mayor, Tory MPs warned today. In a letter in today's Standard, 11 MPs accuse the Labour candidate of being "on the side of union bosses", and attacked his pledge to make running mate Val Shawcross chairwoman of the Transport for London board. They say Ms Shawcross has "stood shoulder-to-shoulder" with the RMT union, and Mr Livingstone would be effectively appointing RMT leader Mr Crow to the board "through a proxy". Yesterday union chiefs were labelled "greedy and unpatriotic" after thousands of Tube workers rejected a 500 bonus to work during the Olympics. Meanwhile, according to internal documents seen by the Standard, bosses of the TSSA transport union agreed to give Mr Livingstone's campaign 25,000 at an executive committee meeting this month. The TSSA is in talks to merge with the RMT, creating a "super-union". Signatories of the letter include Wimbledon's Stephen Hammond, the chairman of London Tory MPs; Chelsea and Fulham's Greg Hands, and Boris Johnson's brother Jo, who represents Orpington. They said Londoners "will not have forgotten that last time Ken Livingstone was Mayor he appointed RMT chief Bob Crow to the board of TfL. "Now he is planning the same through a proxy. Mr Livingstone has announced he wants [Val Shawcross] to chair the TfL board ... This is akin to handing Bob Crow the keys to London's Tube, bus, train and tram network." Ms Shawcross's spokesman said: "Rather than throwing around baseless allegations Tory MPs should try using public transport and experience what ordinary Londoners put up with. Under their Mayor strikes have increased and fares have rocketed." Commenting on the TSSA gift, Lib-Dem candidate Brian Paddick said: "Donations of this sort raise the question as to whether Ken can be an objective Mayor." A TSSA spokesman said the new sum given to Mr Livingstone was in fact 10,000 and the 25,000 figure may have included previous donations. Mr Livingstone said: "The TSSA is affiliated to Labour and its support is welcome. Boris Johnson's policy of not talking to unions has led to more strikes."

Greg Hands M.P.s response to the phase two Thames Tunnel consultation
I have represented Fulham in Parliament since 2005, as the M.P. for Hammersmith and Fulham from 2005 to 2010, and both Fulham and Chelsea since the 2010 General Election. Prior to entering Parliament, I was a Fulham Councillor for Eel Brook Ward from 1998 to 2006, and served as Leader of the Conservative Group on Hammersmith and Fulham Council. I have lived in Fulham since 1990. Since the close of the phase one consultation last year, Thames Water has changed its preference for the Thames Tunnel main drive site in West London, and now wishes to tunnel from Fulham, on Carnwath Road Riverside. It was not considered viable during phase one and the choice of this residential site has, understandably, provoked alarm. Many hundreds of constituents have contacted me to express their opposition. I have consistently raised the problems relating to an urban, residential site in my weekly email bulletin and through leaflets, inviting residents to respond. I have also participated in two large public meetings and numerous meetings with residents groups, only a minority of which involved Thames Water. In consequence, I can confidently state that the local community is overwhelmingly hostile to using Carnwath Road in this way. Many constituents also share my apprehension that beyond the sitespecific problems the Thames Tunnel project does not represent value-for-money in its current form, and that the costs would be loaded onto every household, many of whom will struggle to pay higher water bills. Site-Specific Issues Carnwath Road Riverside Carnwath Road Riverside is in the heart of a residential area, with 15,000 homes and 2,000 businesses located within 2,000 yards of the proposed tunnelling operations. A number of businesses are located on the site itself, and would be lost, with consequences for local employment. Each of the surrounding streets is predominately residential. The site is ringed by social and private housing, including John Dwight House, Philpot Square and the Piper Building, which would directly overlook continuous, 24-hour excavation. In addition to Thomass Fulham Preparatory School, there are six state schools and nurseries in the immediate area, none of which were considered in the Environmental Information Report: Hurlingham and Chelsea School, Sulivan Primary School, Lcole Marie dOrliac, Queensmill School, Twice Times Nursery School, and Sands End Pre-school. There are also several parks and open spaces, including South Park and Hurlingham Park, which are used and enjoyed by residents from nearby streets and beyond. The intended duration of construction and tunnelling is of grave concern to those living next to the site. Besides the loss of the river path, they will have to contend with six years of noise, dust and odour during construction, and potential odour whenever the tunnel is in operation. Although these fears have been downplayed by Thames Water, its Environmental Information Report identifies both Thomass Fulham and local homes as subject to all three factors. Despite the plans to construct a temporary shed around the works, the 24-hour excavation and removal of spoil will inevitably have an impact in terms of dust and noise, as will the loading and unloading of heavy lorries. Contained operations on other wharves along the river have been demonstrated to have impact on neighbouring properties, even with permanent containing structures and dust-removal and dampening equipment. The Environmental Information Report notes the likely significant air quality and odour effects of constructing and operating the tunnel. It is the operational effects that residents find most disturbing. Once the tunnel is functioning, the report suggests that odour would be discernible for more than 125 hours in a typical year. There is no indication of the duration of these episodes, which would clearly become a feature of local life. Assurances that carbon filtration would negate any sewer odour do not appear to be borne out by Thames Waters own research. Of concern far beyond the immediate area around Carnwath Road are the estimated traffic movements during the six years of construction. An extrapolation from the figures provided in the Site Information Paper show that there would be more than 29,000 heavy lorry movements, transporting large machinery, pre-cast segments of tunnel lining, spoil and other materials. Lorry trips would average 31 per day for two years during main tunnelling and peak at 33 per day when the tunnel is being lined. The proposed access route uses Wandsworth Bridge Road, New Kings Road and the Kings Road, all of which are already congested and are lined with flats and houses. The road network in Fulham and Chelsea is one of the most congested in London. According to the most recent TfL data, Hammersmith and Fulham is second only to the City of London for delays, with motorists trapped in tailbacks for 66,849 hours every year. Given the existing pressure, it is astonishing that no assessment has been made by Thames Water of the impact on local traffic. The lost regeneration opportunities for the site would span more than a decade, with a permanent loss imposed by the ventilation structures, which, as planned, split the wharves along the river. The use of the protected wharves for removing some of the tunnelling spoil has been hailed as positive step by Thames Water, but this is hardly the use that the protection was intended to make possible, despite the preferability of barges to lorries. In reality, protected status has helped prevent regeneration, and the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham has been lobbying for its removal for many years. Although Thames Water offer a reduced footprint requirement for a western site as explanation for why Carnwath Road was not considered during phase one, it remains unclear why Fulham was suddenly preferred to Barn Elms, other than the wish to avoid using Metropolitan Open Land. Both sites would entail the loss of the river path during construction, and the implications of using smaller barges slightly further upriver are not particularly significant. While the planning restrictions on Metropolitan Open Land have been presented as decisive, the temporary nature of the loss, with only a small permanent footprint in one corner of the space, put this in question. The costs surrounding land acquisition are also likely to be lower at Barn Elms. I have repeatedly asked Thames Water to expand on the reasoning provided in the consultation documents, but this has not been forthcoming. It cannot be right to use a residential area when non-residential sites are available. Kirtling Street is not mentioned as an alternative in the documents and has only been subject to any serious investigation in recent weeks. The option of a longer run of tunnelling direct from Kirtling Street to Acton must be taken, if it is viable, and should have featured in the consultation process. My remaining comments on Carnwath Road are only relevant if the considerations above are ignored, and the opinion of residents is overridden. If tunnelling proceeds at the site, it is essential to attempt to mitigate the impact on Fulham. Barge use should not limited by cost or left to contractors to determine; instead, barges should be used whenever it is technically feasible. While I believe that site traffic would still be unacceptably disruptive, if lorries are only used where absolutely unavoidable, and scheduled for non-peak, daytime hours, this would help prevent complete paralysis of the road network. The design of the permanent structures on the site should also be revised. The impression created by the lumpen, bunker-like building is not alleviated by a reed-bed concrete relief a traditional design would be far more in keeping. Thames Water has made much of the legacy of Bazalgette; in this respect, it should seek to emulate the structures he created. The same concern applies to the ventilation tower which, beyond any concerns about odour, is a brutal imposition to the riverbank. Chelsea Embankment Foreshore This is, in effect, a non-residential site, although traffic movements remain of concern to residents. I am content with the design, which is sensitive to its context, but understand that some groups are concerned about the interruption to the line of the embankment. Cremorne Wharf Depot I am pleased that the location has been altered, following discussions with residents and the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; access through Cremorne Gardens itself would have been detrimental to a much-valued space. However, previous concerns about disturbance, dust, odours and traffic still apply. Strategic Issues My greatest fear is that, at 4.1 billion, the cost of the tunnel is too large to justify the environmental benefits. Projected costs have risen massively from early estimates, and there has to be a point at which they outweigh the advantages of a cleaner river. The River Thames is already cleaner than at any point since the nineteenth century, with the GLA describing it as one of the cleanest metropolitan rivers in the world. The Environment Agency went further and lauded it as the beauty queen of the planets waterways after it won the International Theiss River Prize for cleanliness in 2010. Thames Waters arguments about future levels of discharge arising from population growth ignore two facts: firstly, that increasing water efficiency combined with sustainable urban drainage systems can mitigate the impact on CSOs; and, secondly, that discharge into the river will be more than halved by existing work on the Lee Tunnel and sewage treatment works, including the improvements at Mogden. The company has repeatedly cited a figure of 39 million tonnes of average annual discharges when making the case for the tunnel. This is disingenuous, applying to all discharges in the tidal Thames now, not the projected total after current work is completed. The tunnel would only capture the remaining 18 million tonnes of discharge, of which more than 95% is rainwater. Moreover, Thames Waters counter-argument that the Lee Tunnel will not improve water quality upstream makes the failure to separate these figures even more egregious, and the failure to include Mogden in the calculations incomprehensible. It is simply a fact that the river will be cleaner throughout, and in parts much cleaner, without constructing the Thames Tunnel. Were the existing state of the river from Hammersmith, past Fulham, to Chelsea of serious concern, a case might still be made; however, the most frequent users of the Thames Path rarely witness anything of note. It is not true to suggest that Londons international reputation is being damaged by the current level of water quality. Anglers, rowers and sailors will experience personal benefits from the tunnel, but others are unlikely to notice any change. Fish kills, perhaps the most visible of effects, will be substantially reduced beforehand by the Mogden STW project. There is certainly an environmental gain from intercepting CSO discharges, but it must be judged against the impact on water bills. Combined water and sewerage charges are regressive, hitting the poorest in society hardest. Bills are already forecast to increase by 70-80 per year, which is significant in the context of the rising costof-living; similar increases in energy costs have caused widespread concern about fuel poverty. In response to such fears, Thames Water argues that bills will only rise towards the national average, ignoring both the higher cost-of-living in London and the South East and the potential for bills to rise by more than forecast. The recent Ministerial Statement warned that relatively small changes in the cost of capital for the project could have a significant impact on bills, which was not reflected in consultation documents. The Treasury has been forced to introduce a 50 annual rebate for South West Water customers from 2013/14 because of the unacceptable impact on customers of its sewerage charges. Were the costs of the Thames Tunnel to rise further, Thames Waters sewerage charges could, in time, exceed the rebated level of sewerage bills in the South West. This possibility is strengthened by the underlying trends: before any Thames Tunnel costs have been apportioned to bills, households face an 11% hike in sewerage charges in 2012/13, more than double the rate of inflation. The tunnels alleged boost to Londons infrastructure has been overstated. Post-construction, the project does not generate any economic growth or employment, but it would permanently reduce households disposable income. Limited benefits during the period of construction are also entirely outweighed by this cost. In contrast to projects like HS2, which is projected to create 20,000 jobs in west London during the first stage alone and stimulate growth across the north of England, the Thames Tunnel will not provide any compensating economic gain. None of these considerations support a do nothing stance, because any level of discharge is regrettable. Rather, I do not believe that alternatives to a full-length tunnel have been properly considered; a belief which has been strengthened by the work of the Selborne Commission and the independent water expert Professor Chris Binnie, who chaired the original Thames Tideway Strategic Study Group. Although both operate largely on the premise that EU requirements should be met in full now, irrespective of a cost-benefit analysis or the environmental case, neither is persuaded of the need for a full-tunnel solution. The Selborne Commission concluded that the so-called Babtie option of a shorter, western tunnel was a viable alternative. It also brought to attention the massive disparity between the sums Thames Water has spent pursuing a tunnel solution and what it has spent investigating sustainable urban drainage systems. There has been a noticeable failure to engage with the European Commission, either by Thames Water or, perhaps more pertinently, the Environment Agency. The Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive obligates a reduction in discharges, not their elimination. With discharges set to more than halve without further action, and yet no discussion having occurred about the level of reduction needed to meet EU requirements, the suspicion of gold plating must be strong. It is not enough for Thames Water to say it is using internationally recognised standards: at issue is what standard would avoid enforcement action from the Commission, and the Commission does not appear to have been asked. It follows that there is an argument for continuing to monitor water quality before making a final decision, in order to determine the impact of the Lee Tunnel and the upgrades to Mogden and other STWs. Extrapolating from the current data relies heavily on assumptions about how this work, which is already underway, will affect the river once it is complete. Finally, I am worried that the strategic issues surrounding the justification for the Thames Tunnel might not fall within the remit of the Infrastructure Planning Commission. Neither of the consultation phases so far has adequately considered these strategic questions. As I elaborate below, there is an expectation among residents that the planning process (in the form of the IPC or its successor) will address the need for the project, and this expectation could be confounded. The Consultation Process I remain disappointed at Thames Waters failure to properly notify me when Carnwath Road was first identified as a site, in the period between the phase one and two consultations. Since then, communications with me have improved, but the same cannot be said for Thames Waters customers. The information that the company has provided with 2011/12 water bills was inadequate and ambiguous, with no reference to the enormous impact the project would have on future bills, or the opportunity for customers to have their say during the anticipated phase two consultation. Indeed, the mention of the project and its impact on bills was buried deep inside the Thames Water brochure accompanying the bills, when it should have been the most prominent item. The phase two process has been undermined by serious shortcomings, although I do appreciate the way senior Thames Water representatives have made themselves available for meetings with me. The fragmented nature of the phase two documents makes it difficult to judge an individual site, as the technical information is spread across a number of reports and appendices that are difficult to isolate online. I doubt whether many constituents have been able to navigate much beyond the Site Information Paper for Carnwath Road, which is limited in scope. Elsewhere on the website, the consultation form compounds this problem by asking respondents to judge the adequacy of Thames Waters documentation, rather than asking simple questions about whether they agree or disagree with particular aspects of the plans. This abstract approach confused many constituents, who have found the simplified form produced by residents groups and the landowners to be much clearer. It should not be necessary for outside groups to have to intervene to make the official consultation comprehensible, and I hope that responses via the simplified form are given equal weight. The environmental case for a tunnel is consistently misrepresented, particularly in the summary documents. Anyone reading them would naturally assume that the tunnel would collect 39 million tonnes of raw sewage, not 18 million tonnes of discharge, of which more than 95 per cent would be rainwater. They would also assume that discharges into the Thames are set to get worse, not more than halve. Moreover, when following the prompts on the Thames Water consultation website, it is not even possible to discuss the strategic case for tunnel without first choosing individual sites about which to comment and then answering a series of site-specific questions. This is a serious deterrent to anyone who is principally concerned about whether a tunnel is the right option. In comparison to the phase one consultation, which was extended, residents living near Carnwath Road have had considerably less time to organise and present their case than campaigners for Barn Elms. This is relevant as the viability of tunnelling to Acton from Kirtling Street was not explored by Thames Water and is still being investigated. That such an obvious alternative was not considered is, in itself, a cause of unease. Nor are any of the potential alternatives to a full tunnel presented in the phase two consultation literature, despite the questions in part two of the website form. A major concern is that the planning context for the consultation is unclear. It is impossible for respondents to know how the consultation will be judged by the IPC, or whether certain issues will be examined later. Many constituents have naturally assumed that strategic questions will be addressed by the IPC, when they will be able to make full representations, perhaps with a greater chance of success than when responding to an organisation that is promoting its own scheme. Yet if the provisions of the draft National Policy Statement for Waste Water are carried into the final document, this might not be the case. In the absence of even the Governments response to the Select Committee report on the draft NPS in March 2011, the role that the IPC will be expected to fulfil is wholly uncertain. Further doubts about the framework provided by the Planning Act 2008 result from the absence of a Section 14 order designating the Thames Tunnel as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project. Without an order, the IPC cannot accept a planning application, and I understand that it has already rejected a number of attempts by Thames Water to serve notice of an application. Under the terms of the draft order published last year, the IPC might be given retrospective powers to deem the phase two consultation to qualify as a pre-application consultation. Attempts to grant retrospective powers are often legally problematic and no order has yet been tabled for consideration by Parliament. Respondents to Thames Waters phase two consultation cannot, at this stage, know how their answers may be judged, or for what purposes. This must put the potential use of the consultation by the IPC in question. Finally, I repeat my concern at the failure to engage sewerage customers outside the areas that would be affected by construction. Fourteen million people would be forced to pay for the tunnel, across a significant swathe of the country. While it might not be a planning consideration, they are surely entitled to be consulted before receiving higher bills. Instead, Thames Water seems to have delegated its fundamental duty to customers to Ofwat. Conclusion Regarding both the fundamental parameters of the Thames Tunnel project and the major site earmarked for my constituency, I implore Thames Water to think again: using Carnwath Road would be a disaster for residents in Fulham, Chelsea and beyond.

Greg Hands M.P. Member of Parliament for Chelsea and Fulham

5 ways to contact Greg Hands M.P.:

By Phone: By email: By post: In person: 020 7219 5448 mail@greghands.com Greg Hands M.P. House of Commons London SW1A 0AA Click here for details of how to book an appointment at Greg Hands M.P.s weekly surgery

www.greghands.com

More news from Greg Hands M.P., coming soon Please forward this email on to anyone you think may be interested. If you have had this email forwarded to you and would like to be added to the mailing list, please send an email to: news@greghands.com with JOIN in the subject heading. To unsubscribe from this list, please return an e-mail to news@greghands.com with "UNSUBSCRIBE" in the subject heading.

Greg Hands M.P. a strong voice for Chelsea & Fulham

Published & Promoted by Jonathan Fraser-Howells on behalf of Greg Hands M.P., both of 1a Chelsea Manor Street, London SW3 5RP