From January 2020 until May 2021, Peter Mason was employed by Commonplace. For much of that time, he was an Executive Board councillor with Ealing Council. Since May 2021, he’s been the leader of Ealing Council.
Also employed by Commonplace since 2020, is John Howard. At the same time Mr Howard has fulfilled the role of Executive Board councillor at Redbridge Council in London, which he still does.
Until May 2022, Rosa Bolger was a Witney town councillor and a West Oxfordshire district councillor. At the same time Ms Bolger was employed by Commonplace.
Neil Walshaw was a councillor for Headingley ward in Leeds. During his tenure as a councillor, there was at least one Commonplace consultation which affected his ward, and over forty Commonplace consultations which affected Leeds. Councillor Walshaw resigned from the council on the 13th January 2023 and joined Commonplace. His resignation occurred shortly before the latest Commonplace consultation began about a scheme which would affect his former ward.
A third of local authorities use a company called “Commonplace” to provide a platform for their consultations. 1 Many of these consultations involve cycle lanes. During these consultations, Commonplace use social media to geo-target interest groups, like cyclists. 23 The reason local authorities like cycle lanes, is that government money is available for them.
References
A web page published by Bethnal Green Ventures in July 2021 in which Mike Saunders the CEO of Commonplace is interviewed and states, “Commonplace now works with nearly a third of local authorities around the country.”↩
See point 2 of Commonplace web page “Social Media Promotion” where it says, “Our team can set up targeted ad campaigns based on location, interests, demographics and channels to make sure you collect a balanced view of community needs.”↩
See Commonplace web page “Creating an Airport Noise Action Plan Consultation” where it says, “Our team can easily geotarget people within the consultations area with paid social ads and even define audiences by age, gender, interest and more.”↩
David Spereall, the Local Democracy Reporter at the Yorkshire evening Post, ended his article called “Woodhouse campaigners fight against Leeds council’s plans to install cycle lanes on A660,” about today’s deputation with the following:
“Labour’s committed to narrowing the gap. But these proposals would widen it.
“The council would be sacrificing a known, existing benefit for local people, for an as yet unquantified benefit for outsiders.”
Stephen Sheard at Look North wrote an article about the deputation for the Look North website entitled, “Leeds traffic plan: Park users angry over road revamp.” Amongst other things, Mr Sheard reported that Connecting Leeds want to encroach on the Moor, but not on narrower roads at either end of the park.
There’s also a short section of video about the proposed bike lines that appeared on Look North. And here’s the reaction on Twitter to the Look North broadcast from some members of the cycling community.
Finally, the issue was also covered on the lunchtime edition of the news on Radio Leeds. Here’s the relevant section read by Sarah Wakefield.
Earlier today, Friends of Woodhouse Moor went as a deputation to a meeting of the full council to protest against proposals for cycle lanes and other infrastructure changes which would negatively affect Woodhouse Moor. The deputation also complained to the council about the biased nature of its consultation exercise. Here is the speech they gave:
“Connecting Leeds want cycle lanes and infrastructure changes along the A660. “Commonplace,” the company providing their platform, has won awards for their high response rate here. They attribute this to repeatedly consulting the same people. As well as being questionable under data protection laws, this is “selection bias.” As is Connecting Leeds having eight meetings with cyclists before the 2018 A660 cycle lane consultation.
“You can complete this consultation without answering open questions. But such consultations are untrustworthy. Commonplace state consultations should have open and closed questions. This matters especially if participants receive incentives. People might be responding to the remuneration, not because they care about the issues. This consultation received over 420 responses in the first 24 hours, an unusually high number.
“The consultation is long and cognitively demanding. It contains lots of information, not always presented clearly. Section 1, grid A, lists 15 bullet points. Before you can answer the questions, you must read the bullet points carefully and then match them with the plans. For the multiple choice questions, you must choose all that apply from 21 options. You have to do this 12 times! This requires a lot of time and sustained mental effort to do properly. It should take at least 25 minutes to complete the consultation. We should be told how long each respondent took as Connecting Leeds will know.
“Commonplace state consultations should avoid biased language. But this Connecting Leeds consultation is full of it.
“They claim they want to make “better use” of space in front of the Arndale Centre. Who would object to something being made better use of?
“When someone drives down a side road, it’s “rat running.” But when they direct drivers down side roads, it’s “re-routing.”
“They claim their changes would reduce accidents. But they don’t tell us their cause or alcohol’s contribution. A council web page which no longer exists stated that the majority involved alcohol.
“By stating the changes would reduce accidents, they get around the obstacle of conservation area status, which makes changes difficult to achieve.
“They want cycle lanes behind bus stops, but don’t mention the dangers, or that Leeds is committed to the Hierarchy of Road Users, with pedestrians at the top.
“They want to turn a pavement across the Moor into a shared cycle lane but don’t mention they’re dangerous.
“They want to encroach on the Moor, but not on narrower roads at either end of the park. We’re not told that this would enable traffic stacking across the Moor, allowing it to flow freely on the narrower roads. Because of slow or static traffic, resultant air pollution and lost green space, the park would become a less attractive destination for locals and students. A park should be a destination, not a transport hub. Locals who don’t own green space would be especially affected
“Respondents are asked plainly how they feel about a “narrower carriageway,” but obliquely how they feel about “re-landscaped public space,” “overgrown shrubs to be removed” and “11 trees removed and replaced.” Who could possibly object to “re-landscaping?” Why is it necessary to state that shrubs are “overgrown?” Instead, people should be asked how they feel about “green space being take away” or “paved green space” or “removing trees.” Presumably people aren’t asked because Connecting Leeds know that nobody likes green space being taken away or ruined.
“”Improved landscaping” comes at the expense of almost a metre of grass verge at the Moor’s edge. And roadway would replace green space at Hyde Park Corner. But we’re not informed about either proposal. The consultation should ask people “how do you feel” about trade-offs directly and unambiguously.
“This use of biased language and the selective presentation of facts is called “response bias.”
“Cycle lanes are socially desirable. But so is preserving green space. Is this why they don’t mention wanting to remove grass verge, thus endangering adjacent trees, or that there’s already little green space in Hyde Park and Woodhouse compared to Weetwood and West Park, where most cyclists originate?
“Connecting Leeds knows whether respondents are local or cycle through the area. So there should be four sets of responses – locals who cycle, those who don’t, non-locals who cycle, and those who don’t. These groups may have sharply differing opinions. We should know how each answered the questions.
“Labour’s committed to narrowing the gap. But these proposals would widen it. The council would be sacrificing a known, existing benefit for local people, for an as yet unquantified benefit for outsiders.
“Local people rejected an almost identical scheme in 2018. Are we to be consulted ad infinitum until we give the desired response?”
You can watch a video of the deputation here. If you watch it to the end, you’ll see that Councillor Asghar Khan was using his mobile phone. Thankfully, this behaviour wasn’t typical.
Earlier today, a consultation went live about proposals for cycle lanes and infrastructure changes along the A660 from its junction with Shaw Lane to Leeds University. It’s being carried out by Connecting Leeds, a body which comprises individuals from Leeds City Council and the West Yorkshire Combined Authority (Metro).
In so far as Woodhouse Moor is concerned, the proposals involve the following:
The removal of several mature trees. Most are diseased. All would be replaced on a three for one basis.
Transferring the inbound bus stop currently located to the south of Raglan Road, to the north of Raglan Road.
The creation of four “floating bus stops.” These are bus stops which have cycle lanes running behind them.
The creation of a shared cycle lane in place of the existing tarmac pavement adjacent to Woodhouse Lane outbound.
The removal of almost a metre of grass verge adjacent to the inbound carriageway to create a segregated cycle lane.
The consultation doesn’t mention that shared cycle lanes and floating bus stops are considered dangerous. Nor does it mention the intention to remove almost a metre of grass verge. Similarly, although it doesn’t affect the Moor, no mention is made of the intention to remove green space at Hyde Park Corner. This would be done in order to create a new lane of traffic.
Whilst the cycle lanes would encroach on the Moor where the A660 is at its widest between the city centre and West Park, there’s no intention to encroach on pavements or property on the much narrower roads at either end of the park, despite the fact that Connecting Leeds intend having two metre wide cycle lanes located here both inbound and outbound. This means that just as with the trolleybus scheme, the intention is to stack traffic on Woodhouse Moor, to allow it to flow freely along the much narrower roads at either end of the park.
Images courtesy of Wikipedia.
The author most famous for creating the Alan Banks detective stories, has died aged 72. He was born in Castleford, grew up in Armley, and went to Leeds University to study English. He emigrated to Canada in 1974, where he died on the 4th October. When he was at Leeds University, he crossed Woodhouse Moor every day on his way back and forth to study. It was on the Moor that he set the crime featured in his book “Caedmon’s Song.” At the book’s start, a young woman is seated on the Lion and Serpent sculpture, when she’s attacked. The book goes on to explore what develops from this attack. You can read his obituary in this Guardian article.
Leeds city Council will not be proceeding this year with the annual bonfire on Woodhouse Moor and other Leeds parks. The council is to be congratulated on taking a big step towards improving air quality and helping Leeds to achieve its aim of zero carbon emissions by 2030. Well done!
“Any hedgehog that is out during the day is in all likelihood in need of help. They are nocturnal, and they will only be out during the day in a desperate attempt to get more food and water, so basically if they are starving and/ or dehydrated/ sick. A hog like that may be lying down or staggering about. They do not ‘sunbathe’.
The best course of action is to take hold of it (in this state, they won’t probably even spike up, and are extremely unlikely to bite, but a bit of cloth is an excellent barrier in any case), put it in a cardboard box somewhere quiet and secure, provide some water and get in touch with a local rescue or a vet. Wash your hands after as they do carry parasites.
The only exception from this are nursing mums, but they will be walking briskly and with purpose – sometimes they just need a break from the kids!
The more people know about this, the more we can help this iconic species that was in very sharp decline; for the first time they started to recover in urban areas (!) basically because people’s awareness has improved on how to lend them a helping hand so it’s all down to efforts of people like you and me.”
In Autumn 2020, Parks and Countryside’s Woodland Creation Team produced proposals to plant two large areas of whips on the main part of Woodhouse Moor. Following consultation with local community groups, these plans were abandoned. In their place, the Climate Change Working Group has devised this undated plan to plant 832 whips in the Cliff Terrace area of the Moor. At a Zoom meeting of the Little Woodhouse Community Association in July 2021, Parks and Countryside assured those present that the Cliff Terrace proposals would be consulted on. This has not happened.
These are the Climate Change Working Group’s proposals for the Cliff Terrace area of the Moor:
Overall Coverage for Alternative Management = 1,872 m 2 (Approx.)
Overall Amount of Proposed Whips with 1.5m Spacing = 832 (Approx.)
Planting scheme for top half of Woodhouse MoorPlanting scheme for bottom half of Woodhouse Moor
In the Summer of 2021, Parks and Countryside agreed to plant several hundred specimen trees on Woodhouse Moor. Each tree was to be protected by a tree guard and was to cost ￡350. By the end of March 2022, just 34 trees had been planted. Apparently, at some point after Summer 2021, the above undated plans were produced by the Climate Change Working Group. The changes that were made to the agreed Summer 2021 plan are unapproved. Under these new unapproved plans, the Climate Change Working Group propose the following:
Overall Coverage for Alternative Management = 29,816 m2 (Approx.)
Overall Amount of Proposed Specimen Trees: 119 (Approx.)
