A “very dangerous” and seemingly barmy plan to leave potholes unrepaired to act as “natural traffic-calming” in the Essex village of Navestock, has focused nationwide media attention on controversial proposals by Parish Councillor Richard Folkson. But, in a letter under ‘More’ below, the councillor at the centre of the media brouhaha denies being the driver of plans that a retired policeman resident says are “very dangerous”, and especially for “the elderly, cyclists, motorcyclists and horse riders”. Mainstream news include reports from the BBC, and Telegraph . A range of more robust comments from the British Blogosphere can be found here. Most accounts imply that Cllr Folkson is some sort of deranged yokel – and fuels this entertaining notion with quotes from retired police officer Roy Tyzack. The ex-cop is reported as saying that it “beggars belief that the people who are supposed to be acting on behalf of the parishioners think it a good idea to put people at risk”. Potholes are “very dangerous” and, “we have a great deal of them”, he adds. However, although this ‘local’ story has made national news on the back of statements by local councillors that are easily sensationalised as barmy, most media coverage is wide of the mark at the centre of this sorry saga and a generally underreported scandal. Local authority failures to repair potholes are increasingly prompting court ruling against local authorities who are breaching their duties of care as latest BBC report of a cyclist’s injuries and compensation highlights. What is less clear is that such waste is irrespective of whether this is ‘just’ a dereliction of governance duty, or the result of a hidden policy agenda to substitute appropriate action to maintain roads with a program of government inaction. Intriguingly, the Guardian and organs of similar tone have averted their output from this issue whereas, Massey of the Mail highlights the extent of these costs here, and David Williams features other angles on the matter here . Correspondingly, TC suspects that the main cause of problems for Folkson, and the central issue here, is not that he originated the idea that local authorities should leave potholes unrepaired – but that he has been exquisitely naive in voicing what many transport planners think to themselves – and use to decide what happens in practice on UK roads. As other reports reveal, the scourge of potholes is widespread throughout the UK highways network and can cause serious injury – especially to vulnerable road users including pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists. TC also suggests that the key reason that this tiny Parish pothole affair has made national news is that it highlights a nationwide scandal that is all too familiar to the great British public. For those who are bothered enough about potholes to report them there are websites to make this easier. One of the first of these was created by the British Motorcyclists Federation BMF who have had some success in prompting repairs here , or you might use fixmystreet.com. Finally, TC notes that It is also clear to some of us that local authorities are allowing roads to be surfaced to such a poor standard that they become potholed in a far shorter period than is reasonable in the 21st century AND at great inconvenience and cost to UK road users.
Letter posetd to cyclists forum.
To everyone that wrote to me concerning Potholes in Navestock,
Firstly I would like to thank everyone for taking the time to write to me about the recent publicity surrounding Pothole repairs in Navestock, but would like to make it clear that I was not the originator of the idea. I will be raising all of the issues that you wrote to me about at the next Parish Council meeting.
Unfortunately , as is often the case in these situations the subject has been wildly misreported in the media with reporting being quite a long way wide of the decision made by the council. I guess we will never stop journalists turning the facts into a story when the actual subject matter is quite different to what they have reported or selectively quoted. My main lesson learned from this is not to speak to the press in the future.
Like many of the people that wrote to me, I am also a keen cyclist and motor cyclist and the last thing we want to do is deteriorate road safety, particularly for these road users. The Navestock proposal only related to the tiniest of minor roads in the Parish which are not suited to fast road transport and can safely be negotiated at no more than 20mph, although some people try to go faster. These are very minor roads and a further reduction in average speed to around 10mph would be beneficial. I would be very unlikely to ride my 650cc motorcycle down any of these roads and if I did so it would be at a slow walking pace. They are absolutely fine for cycling down at a sedate pace.
All the other roads in Navestock which see regular through traffic will be maintained as normal – although one of the side affects of all the publicity is that Navestock has now been swamped by pothole repair crews from Essex County Council so that we will probably have the best repaired roads in the county very soon – maybe that is a positive unintended consequence of the Council decision.
It is extremely disappointing that so many individuals chose to send me personal abusive attacks for the decision made by the council when my name just appears as the web site contact.
I hope that these individuals will show the same level of respect that I have shown to them by replying to the large number of e-mails to set the record straight.
Regards
Richard Folkson