This may not be a councillor-blog, but this is certainly a councillor-post, aimed at the few local Rose Hill residents who read this blog.

On 24 April there will be a joint meeting of the Rose Hill Regeneration Partnership and the Rose Hill Residents’ and Tenants’ Association at 7.30pm at Rose Hill Community Centre. All local residents and tenants are invited to come along and find out more about the plans for the building project, the wider estate regeneration, and all the other groups and services who are active in our community.

For once, most of the organisations delivering services on the estate will be in one place at one time, including:
Rose Hill and Littlemore children’s centre
Imagine Nursery
Learning Communities
Rose Hill neighbourhood action group, our local police beat team and PCSOs
Streetwardens
Rose Hill estate manager
Oxford City Council housing development team
Oxford Citizens Housing Association
The residents’ and tenants’ association
Oxford Healthy Living and the Rose Hill health trainers
Rose Hill Primary School
Rose Hill youth club
Rose Hill community association and social club
Rose Hill advice centre
Rose Hill News

It would be great to get a really good turnout, and make sure local people get to have their say about the redevelopment and regeneration.

I’m really cross at the news that despite a really strong bid, there will not be one single unitary authority for the city of Oxford. Great. No local accountability at all for the delivery of youth services, education, social services, major road repairs, and the county council gets to carry on redistributing tax money away from the city to the rural hinterland.

Here’s something you won’t see often on this blog - a post on defence policy. I’m not convinced that Trident replacement is quite what we should spend millions of pounds on, so I’m disappointed (though not surprised) that the vote passed this evening. But, I was really pleased to see my MP, Andrew Smith, voted against it - a principled decision from an MP who doesn’t take rebelling lightly. From tomorrow’s Oxford Mail:

One of the Labour rebels, Oxford East MP Andrew Smith, said he had “always loathed” nuclear weapons.
He said the estimated £20bn cost of the project would be better spent tackling climate change, improving schools and hospitals and ensuring conventional troops were better equipped.

Update: Phillip Cowley on the rebels here, including a full list of who rebelled.

I’ve a letter in the Guardian today, rather brutally cut, about this piece of nonsense they published as investigative journalism on the front page on Monday. I originally suggested that talking to the CPRE about how dreadful it all was without getting any balance by talking to to a family in temporary accommodation who would rather like some houses to be built made for one-sided journalism, but then at least what appears in the paper has the benefit of being succinct.

There’s an article in today’s Observer about Milliband and Brown scrapping about climate change. So far, so tedious. I was happily sat with the paper and a coffee when I read a splutteringly preposterous comment from a Friends of the Earth spokesperson, which I just have to share with you. For context, he was talking about personal carbon allowances, something I think I probably support. The article says:

Official figures recently released to parliament showed better progress in reducing CO2 levels had actually been made under the Tories in the years 1990-97 than under Labour after the election, he said, although not due to any eco-friendly efforts they made: ‘We were switching at that time from coal fired power stations to [cleaner] gas stations but it was more driven by Arthur Scargill and the miners’ strike than the environment.

Okay. Then the money shot:

‘The recesssion did also help a bit: during times of recession people aren’t going to work and are driving less.’

See what I mean?! Not the same world as the rest of us. Never mind millions of unemployed people and people losing their homes right left and centre; the early 80s recession was good because it decreased carbon dioxide going into the atmosphere, of course. As was commented to me earlier today, I’m sure there was decreased carbon consumption during the Black Death - doesn’t mean we should hope for a pandemic to decrease our carbon footprint. More seriously, don’t people like FOE realise that buying in ordinary people who like having a job and being able to pay the rent or mortgage is pretty vital in creating a coalition big enough to force action on climate change?

I wondered why I had been called a fascist and threatened with violence five times in the last 24 hours. I deleted most of the comments, but here’s a choice example, from someone who calls herself “Sarah”. Her email is slaw453@hotmail.co.uk, and she’s posting from 84.68.143.127:

Antonia, without a doubt you are utter unwashed scum, and I am seriously looking forward to bumping into you for a little chat real soon.

Turns out this post had been linked to from the BNP’s chatroom at some point in the last day or so.

I’m a little behind the times, but I reckon the YouGov poll for Monday’s Telegraph makes interesting reading:

The survey of more than 1,000 members found that 73 per cent wanted a contest and just 11 per cent thought it better if Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, was elected unopposed. If no one came forward to take on Mr Brown, more than half want an “affirmative ballot” so members can decide whether or not to endorse Mr Brown as the new leader.
If there were such a ballot, then Mr Brown would likely romp home, commanding nearly two thirds - 63 per cent - of the vote, with 21 per cent saying they would reject him.
However, if a strong candidate such as David Miliband, the Environment Secretary, came forward in a two-horse race then Mr Brown’s support slips to just 52 per cent, with Mr Miliband on 25 per cent.
The poll also found that 70 per cent wanted the Prime Minister to stand down immediately or after May’s local, Scottish and Welsh elections.

So far, so much we know. I am infuriated, though, that party members want an “affirmative ballot” if there’s only one candidate. We really don’t have the thousands and thousands in the bank to waste money on luxuries.

The ranking for deputy leadership candidates was also interesting. Both union members and party members ranked the contenders in the order Benn - Johnson - Harman - Hain - Cruddas - Blears. As a declared Cruddas supporter, this says to me that he has to try harder to get out there in the mainstream press and reach the non-junkies.

By the way, one of the 1115 members of the Labour Party who took part in the survey was me. In an amazing turnaround for YouGov, they sent me an interesting poll, not some nonsense about credit cards and perceptions of white goods suppliers. If you’d like to join the panel and earn me some credit while you’re at it, click here.

On the eve of International Women’s Day, it ill behoves a feminist to criticise women who’re organising for change for women. But brace yourself: in an unsisterly (unsororal?) way, as I’m about to do just that.

I’ve always had a soft spot for the Oxford International Women’s Collective, who organise the annual International Women’s Festival. Made it to a few events a couple of years ago, but was always glad that even though I don’t organise for feminism in Oxford, preferring to concentrate on other causes, someone was.

So it was with dismay I came across the programme for this year’s festival (edited highlights):

Festival Procession Launch Marching for the Environment - Standing Up for Our Futures
Textiles for Peace Workshop
Tread Gently on the Earth - International Evening
Straw Bales – Building A Sustainable Future Does Not Cost The Earth
Five Rhythm Dance-Celebrating Women’s Mental Health
The “Sacred” Feminine: Sustaining the Earth
Music Changes Women’s Lives
The Feminine Call to Nature – A spiritual Perspective on the inner and Outer Environment
Women as Guardians of the Environment
Oneness of a Person and their Environment - Women with Impact
Another Inconvenient Truth: The adverse effect of animal foods on the environment
Wearing Women’s Wilderness - Kismet: Green Things Growing

To be fair to the organisers, there are some pointful events: a discussion of women and globalisation, a Palestinian woman speaker, and a women’s studies open afternoon at Ruskin - and a couple of feisty-looking social events. That’s about it. But does anyone else read programmes of fringe enviro-nonsense about the sodding sacred feminine and think, WHAT ABOUT FIGHTING FOR EQUAL PAY?! We’ve not solved domestic violence, trafficking, prostitution, gender segregation, women’s poverty pay, the motherhood penalty, decent pensions for women - and we’ve got time to dance in circles and wear our wilderness?!

PS: To add insult to injury, the city council, which is about to withdraw funding from the Dovecote Family centre and Blackbird Leys IT hub, puts money into this rubbish. And I should say that I was asked to organise an event on Rose Hill, and declined.

Since I last posted, there has been a major change in my life - leaving YWCA, where I’ve worked in two roles for the last four and a half years. I’ve just home from the third day of my new job, having taken a week off to collect my thoughts and see the beautiful city of Rome. Thanks to everyone that’s been in contact to wish me luck, and hello to all my new colleagues who didn’t hesitate to let me know that they’d found my online home! (As if my server logs wouldn’t have told me anyway…)

Update, Thursday 8 March: The ever-lovely Giles decided to have a dig at me for not updating this blog for two and a half whole weeks in his ever-fascinating Oxford Mail Insider colum today. Promise I didn’t know that when I started blogging again last night!