A second visit to Future 40

Last week, following the public meeting on Epsom’s Future 40 project (reference 2), which I attended in January and noticed at reference 1, BH and I attended a follow up meeting, again at Bourne Hall, although not in the rather grand subterranean theatre, rather in one of the ground floor meeting rooms, plenty large enough for the circular shape of the building to come through. With the object of the meeting being to present the draft report of the Future 40 consultation and to take views and comments.

The biscuit

Damian Roberts, Chief Operating Officer, whom I had seen with his boss at the first meeting, led the meeting and did a lot of the talking. I thought he and his colleagues did a good job of running a meeting of this sort. There was also a new-to-me sort of biscuit provided with the tea and coffee, snapped above. An alternative, high calorie alternative to Bourbons, snapped above.

Right speaker, probably the right venue, right subject, wrong meeting

Perhaps as many as fifty residents turned out, including a good proportion of people of working age and at least one representative from our ruling Residents’ Association. Same format as last time: talk, managed break out groups, roundup and windup – on time. Once again, I was reminded how useful it was to hear what other people think about things; to be reminded how decent and sensible people can have views which are quite different to one’s own. For example, one chap in my group was sorry that the King’s Arms in East Street had come down, while I thought that it was high time they put some flats there and that starting over was better than make over – as they did with the Queen’s Head in South Street. Differences which the council has to talk through, has to accommodate somehow in whatever view it might come to.

Roberts built his talk around five topics which he believed the consultation had revealed as the things that people were really interested in: green and vibrant, smart and connected, opportunity and prosperity, safe and well, cultural and creative. Had some communications expert told him that good things should come in pairs, rather as brands often do, as in Villeroy & Boch. Something which I believe that we get from our northern rather than from our southern ancestors. And which, as some of the audience pointed out, is all fine and dandy, everybody wants this sort of thing, but how does it translate into action, into decisions? Particularly when central government, as well as taking away most of the money, is also taking over a lot of the planning, with central planners overruling local planners, often in favour of developers. In which, as ever, there was a whiff of nimbyism: yes we need a lot more accommodation for people, but not anywhere near me.

Word cloud

He was also rather keen on the sort of graphic – which he called a word cloud – that you get if you feed a whole lot of text into the sort of tool offered at reference 5. A graphic on one side of A4 which has the more important words from your text in larger fonts, in brighter colours, and which, if you are lucky, brings together words which seem to be related. An interesting way of summarising the results of a consultation, and I am poking around the various ways one might do it – and the various tools that there are out there to do it for you. With, as far as I can make out, the one at reference 5 not doing anything other than horizontal words and not making any attempt to bring associated words together on the page, with their placement being random - but it is easy to use. Furthermore, I think there is some mismatch between his five topic pairs and his word cloud. As ever, all a lot more complicated than one might at first think!

I think he might have done more to explain how high level topics of this sort are supposed to help dealing with low level particulars. So in coming to a decision one looks at how the various options play against the various topics.

He did not tell us how high up the preservation of Epsom Common came on his list although he did tell us how Epsom comes at or near the top of all kinds of other lists. Educational provision and attainment good. Culture good. Communications good. Pay good. But there were some bad things which needed to be addressed and housing was a problem, with Epsom coming too near the top of the price of housing list. Too many young people who were brought up in Epsom could not afford to bring their families up here.

And he did not tell us how they were going to balance the needs of Epsom with those of Ewell. No sense that attracting stuff to Epsom was a zero-sum game, in that that stuff has to come from somewhere else, perhaps Ewell.

But as I said above, a good effort. Hard to see how they could have done more to take the views of residents on their aspirations for the borough.

PS: interesting to go to a meeting in partner mode. Not something I approve of in workplaces - or in Houses of Commons.

References

Reference 1: https://psmv4.blogspot.com/2019/01/fake-56.html.

Reference 2: https://www.future40.org/. The Future 40 website.

Reference 3: https://democracy.epsom-ewell.gov.uk/documents/s13313/Future40%20-%20Draft%20Long-term%20vision%20for%20Epsom%20and%20Ewell.pdf. The draft report.

Reference 4: https://democracy.epsom-ewell.gov.uk/documents/g766/Public%20reports%20pack%2030th-Jul-2019%2019.30%20Strategy%20and%20Resources%20Committee.pdf?T=10. The draft report in context. That is to say, from page 201 of 268. Future 40 Engagement: a report to the Strategy and Resources Committee, 30 July 2019. Agenda item 10.

Reference 5: https://worditout.com/.