A CALL has been made for a council to hold meaningful consultations after a majority of people opposed 20mph speed limits in a move that received national attention.
The Liberal Democrat administration at Wokingham Borough Council has been driving forward with reducing speed limits across the area.
Recent examples where 20mph zones have been created are Woodlands Avenue in Woodley and Culver Lane and Palmerstone Road in Earley.
That is despite a majority of people opposing the speed reductions in Earley during a statutory consultation, which was covered by The Times.
The Conservatives introduced a motion at a full council meeting to genuinely review and revise policies if a clear majority of people are against a proposal.
They also argued the Lib Dems had failed to take residents’ feedback on board.
Councillor Dave Edmonds (Conservative, Spencers Wood & Swallowfield) said: “As Conservatives, we take a different approach.
“We trust residents. We believe that the people who live in our communities understand their needs, their concerns and priorities better than anyone else. Our role is not to go through the motions of listening. It is actually to hear, to reflect, and to adapt.
“We want to work with residents to develop solutions that are practical, balanced, and rooted in local reality, not imposed from above and not pushed through regardless of feedback.
“What is particularly concerning is that this issue goes beyond consultations.
“We are also seeing a pattern where positions taken during elections do not align with the decisions taken in this chamber. Residents are told one thing on the doorstep, promises are made, opposition is voiced, and then when it comes to a vote, the opposite happens.
“The example of Hall Farm is a case in point. Campaigning one way locally, then acting another way when it matters most, sends a very damaging message and what is said to residents is not what guides decisions here. If we are serious about democracy, that cannot be acceptable.”
Cllr Andrew Gray (Labour, Shinfield) took issue with the Conservatives claiming they listen to residents, giving an example where 384 people opposed a decision to scrap school crossing patrols in 2018, which went ahead anyway.
He said: “For you to say that the conservatives take a different approach to consultation is just plainly false.
“Whilst I agree with the principle of transparency and that’s important, there’s just too much in this which isn’t deliverable, logical or desirable.
“We’ve got to remember that consultations aren’t referendums. We can’t just say that if there’s a majority against or in favour of something then that’s what we go with.
“And this needs to be recognised. And this motion suggests that we should move to a referendum approach with consultations.
“Meaningful consultations need quality responses over just quantity.”
Agreeing, Stephen Conway (Liberal Democrats, Twyford, Ruscombe & Hurst), the council leader, said: “This motion mixes up voting and consulting.
“Consultation is not voting. Its value is primarily qualitative, not quantitative.
“It’s the quality of argument that counts, not numbers for or against a proposal.
“The motion seeks to bind the council to abide by majority views, however unrepresentative the responders may be of the general population, even when very few people have responded and whatever the subject of the consultation.
“In 2017, Justice O Farrell ruled that there is no obligation on the consulter to adopt the majority view based on feedback during the consultation process.
“These rulings make it very difficult, if not impossible, for councillors in good faith, to support this motion because it is flawed.”
The motion failed with 27 councillors voting against it at the meeting on March 26.
