The evening on 25 June 2024 was billed as an opportunity to question your candidates on the Mortlake Brewery development and local and national issues. Some 70 attendees were asked to identify the top issues for the candidates to address. It was disappointing that the UK’s relationship with the EU was not even an option for discussion. The national Brexit omertà seemed to be alive and well at the local hustings.
The four candidates present were Laura Coryton (Labour), Sara Gezdari (Conservative), Sarah Olney (Lib Dem) and Chas Warlow (Green). The Chair, Dame Una O’Brien, asked for opening remarks about the brewery development. The following commentary is based on notes taken by blog subscriber Richard Barfield.
The bold sections are added as comments on what the candidates said – or did not say. They are written in the (almost) certain knowledge that the Lib Dems will win Richmond Park and this event was more important for what was said about the Mortlake Brewery development.
Sarah Olney focused on the proposed investment of £41 million (from the DfE) for a secondary school offering technology, science, engineering etc. She pointed out that travelling distances to schools are currently an issue for students. She noted that in last September, 82 students could not be placed in their first-choice schools and that the population in the area is expected to increase. She noted that the DfE had been asked twice to look at the need for a secondary school and they had concluded both times that one was needed. She went on to say there were only three schools on this side of the river and that there will be increasing demand in the future from the development of the brewery site and the Kew retail site. She pointed out that government funding through local councils is only available for new schools and not the expansion of existing schools.
One of the problems here is that the DfE conclusions were based on figures provided by Achieving for Children, which have long been challenged. The assertions are highly speculative: few of the 1085 residential units are likely under existing plans to be suitable for parents whose children might attend that school. Sarah Olney carefully avoided anything about the fact that this would be a school for 1200 pupils, which would have major implications for traffic and infrastructure in the area. In any event Richmond Park Academy has stated publicly that it could provide for any likely additional children. Future residents at the far off development at Kew would be more likely to attend Chiswick High School.
It does appear to be the case that DfE funding is only available for new schools and that maybe provides an understanding of why Richmond upon Thames Council is so determined to hang on to the proposed school, no matter what other arguments there are. But Lib Dem politicians now ignore the facts: the local primary and secondary schools do not want this additional school; an additional secondary school diluting numbers will damage the prospects of existing schools providing sixth forms; primary school rolls are falling and pregnancies dropping.
She then went on to imply that objectors to the current scheme do not recognise the needs of others.
This is now a meme generated from the Council Central Office. It ignores the facts: 682 opponents of the scheme lodged objections. 644 donated to the fund to enable the Mortlake Brewery Community Group to be represented at the Planning Inquiry. Are they all Nimbys? A mere eighteen indicated support. A further 88 letters were removed from the Council website because many of them were shown to be false: a real fact that the Council declines to address.
Chas Warlow emphasized the importance of the need for affordable housing. Laura Coryton said that there was no great demand for luxury apartments which dominate the proposed development. Sarah Olney did not address the issue.
To this part of the debate it has to be added that from Battersea to Vauxhall there are tower blocks with empty flats. Affordable housing in the proposed development is down to a paltry 7%. This is clearly an embarrasment for many councillors and a main reason for the GLA opposing the development.
The Chair then asked for views on the transport and infrastructure implications of the development.
Chas Warlow wanted to see a much wider reduction in car use. Sarah Olney said that one of her key concerns was that the rail crossing in Mortlake should be no less safe because of any changes. She then deflected the discussion to Hammersmith Bridge being the major issue in terms of traffic congestion and went on to flag the delay in the provision of government funding to remedy it.
The Public Planning Inquiry in November 2024 will allow a fuller independent examination of these and other issues. Possible motives for Lib Dem politicians’ continuing support for the development will be explored in a future blog.
