Park & Ride?

This Monday, the Leicestershire County Council and Leicester City Council opened the third park and ride scheme, aimed at those coming in from the north of the county. Take up has been slow; it is the first week of the county's school holidays, if you didn't already know. However, going by the comments on this article in the Leicester Mercury, it would appear that the scheme is doomed to failure. Some even revel in the prospect.

Public transport in Leicester and the county is notoriously poor. Services are split between different operators, with no integration between any of the companies involved. Travelling from one part of the county to another can mean buying multiple tickets. There is a Flexi Ticket, that allows travel across most operators, but this is not widely advertised, and when I once asked an Arriva bus driver about it, he denied all knowledge. The cost is higher than a day ticket with just one operator, and is limited to the city and suburbs.

On top of that, services often run to a timetable of their own making; I have often waited ridiculously lengthy times for a bus in the past, with the longest wait being close to an hour for a service that should have been running every 8 minutes.

Unreliability can be blamed on other motorists. It is true that in Leicestershire, we have some of the worst road systems in the UK. The BBC East Midlands news programme reported last year that the A426 into the city was the most congested road in the region. Calls to use public transport fall on deaf ears, as motorists know that bus services are unreliable, yet don't see that they are part of this problem.

Getting motorists out of their cars and onto public transport is also thwarted by the cost. The main operators in the city appear to be more concerned with increasing profit margins, as I blogged back in February. 

But even so, where the cost of running a car and the cost of parking outweighs the cost of a bus ride, some people will not give up their cars. They see the car as giving them more freedom, even if it's to sit in a traffic jam.

The Park & Ride scheme, to me, is the best of both worlds. The buses are clean, and unless there are major problems on the roads, they are very reliable, having been planned to use routes that have bus lanes. You also get the comfort of your car at the very start and end of your journey, so if you are ladened with shopping, or it's raining, you don't have to suffer.

I do think that the Leicester schemes are somewhat short-sighted.

Firstly, the services only operate until 7pm. Given that Leicester wants to compete with Nottingham, and the improvements to the city centre to give it a more cosmopolitan vibe with the bars and restaurants, it seems bizarre that there is no evening or night service. In Nottingham, there are Park & Ride schemes that operate until 1am.

For extra revenue, why not use the Park & Ride sites as taxi hubs at night? For a £2 flat fare from the city centre, anyone who has been out in town could get the bus to Enderby, or Birstall, and then pay for a taxi to the outlying towns and villages, reducing the cost of getting home. Wouldn't something like this encourage more people into the city?

The second shortfall is the limited stops. Say I wanted to go to Braunstone Gate, and not the city centre. I would have to get off the bus at St Nicholas Place, which has driven past the bus stop opposite Duns Lane, a shorter walk in stupid heels.

The original Enderby service did a loop around the city centre that has been cut. This served the Infirmary, and had been recommended for the football and rugby. Now that this loop has gone, that's fewer people potentially using the service.

As for the football and rugby, it surely can't be difficult to re-route the service to drop off and stop on Aylestone Road, thus easing congestion on an already busy road?

Oh, and provide an evening service when required.

I really do hope that the numbers at the Birstall site do pick up. Just to annoy some of the blinkered car users who refuse to accept that they are a big part of the problem with traffic in this city.

As if pupillage applications weren't hard enough...

The Bar Council yesterday made candidates who used the online Pupillage Portal aware that there have been problems again with the system. This time, it would appear that a software glitch meant that part of the application form was not printed out for assessment; in this case, the questionnaire section.

For those not familiar with the process, around 250 sets of chambers use the Portal to recruit pupil barristers. It's an online application system separated into sections. Some of the information required is saved for use with all application, however the questionnaire section contains questions that are specific to the chambers that the candidate is applying to.

Candidates can select up to 12 sets to apply to. This in itself doesn't help prospective pupils, who are limiting their chances of securing pupillage by restricting the number of applications that can be made. As the system operates once a year, and to a strict timetable, it is important to get an application right.

Because of this, the aspiring barrister will spend a lot of time and effort researching and selecting which chambers to apply to.

Further, many hours can be spent drafting, redrafting, and redrafting again, their answers to each of the questions posed. it's a long and laborious process, and one that I personally started well in advance of the opening date.

So to find out that my application may not have been complete, when assessed by the chambers that I applied to was, well, bloody annoying.

The whole process of trying to find a pupillage is soul-destroying enough as it is. Having gone through the waiting process, and the disappointment of rejection, to now have this bombshell dropped upon me has sent my fragile ego into turmoil.

Has my lack of success been down to the fact that half my application was missing? After all, I had been encouraged to apply to a number of sets, and advised as to how to deal with the questionnaire section.

Or, most likely, will I find out that there was nothing wrong with the way my form was printed, and I am just setting myself up for further "rejection" and disappointment?

Of course, what does this mean for applicants who have been affected? The Bar Council article mentions delaying pupillage offers. This suggests that it's to allow chambers to reassess and possibly interview those affected. 

Will chambers do this? I am sure some will, but what's to stop a pupillage committee from saying "sorry, you didn't meet our rigorous criteria" because they've already settled on their new pupil(s), or they can't get the same panel together to make a fair assessment?

Reading some of the forums, and tweets, there are those who think that doing this is equally unfair, after all, if chambers have already decided on their pupil(s), how can there be a fair assessment of an affected candidate? Or even of the candidates already interviewed?

This episode is another in a long line of errors that leads me to believe that the whole process needs to be looked at. Is it right and fair that aspiring barristers should be limited in such a way? After all, the odds on getting pupillage are bad enough as it is.

Also, I would ask is a system such as the Portal the right way to go about selecting prospective barristers. I can see that the form is very good for sifting based on academic achievement, but how much weight is given to the questionnaire itself? Is this only considered after the initial sifting? If so, then there is no point in applying through the Portal if, for example, you needed to explain a career break, a lack of mooting experience, or a poor result.

Whilst I understand that the Bar is unforgiving and tough, the Portal system doesn't seem to be forgiving for those who haven't managed not to cock up along the way. Chambers who recruit from CVs and covering letters seem to be more understanding than those using the Portal, contrary to what I had been told....

Whilst it is right that we have been informed of this error, a huge part of me wishes that the Bar Council had kept it quiet. I, for one, don't want to suffer the disappointment all over again.

And they say women take their time getting ready...

What a morning.

Had a bit of a lazy start, as I wasn't due in court until 12pm. I'd just finished my cuppa, brekkie and my meds (asthma & hayfever, before you start...), when the Agency phoned me to ask me to take an emergency application at 9.45am.

I accepted.

Bearing in mind, I was still in my pyjamas, and it was 8.37am when I was called, I managed to shower, brush teeth, brush hair, dress, gather my bits and pieces together, drive 16.4 miles without breaking the speed limit, park the car, walk to the court house, get through security, and find a quiet spot to take telephone instructions by 9.26am.

Not bad.

Plus, I "won".

If this kind of dedication isn't worthy of a pupillage, then I don't know what is.

Overseas Aid - another view

The news of cuts at local and national Government level has sparked a flurry of comments on my Twitter and Facebook timelines, mostly along the lines that if we are making so many cuts here, why the hell are we sending money abroad?

On the face of it, there appears to be no logic. Old people suffering, kids being brought up in homes that can only look up to the poverty line, it does seem stupid to help those in need elsewhere.

However, most of these people also support closing our borders.

International Aid is a fraction of Government spending. If that Aid can be used to make conditions better in a person's own country, then surely that negates the need for that person to up sticks and move to the UK.

Which would cost the UK taxpayer more, wouldn't it?

Food for thought...

You're watching Sky Courts News

"Good morning, it's set to be a busy day ahead. Don't forget our County Court round up on the half hour, and you can keep up to date with the latest fixtures and results on the InfoBar. 

Coming up, we've the news in the big murder trial in Portsmouth, but first, we have some breaking news from Derby Crown Court; let's go over to our reporter".

"Yes, extraordinary happenings here this morning in the case of the Crown versus Whiley. Mr Whiley has been charged with a number of offences, and had indicated at the preliminary hearing he would be entering a 'Not Guilty' plea at today's Plea and Case Management Hearing. 

However, when arraigned, Mr Whiley shocked the Court by entering 'Guilty' pleas to all charges. That includes the serious charge of perverting the course of justice".

"Unbelievable. So what's next?"

"Well, the case has been postponed for the preparation of pre-sentence reports, and Mr Whiley will be sentenced in three weeks time, here at Derby Crown Crown, where our cameras will be live to show you the events as they unfold."

"Thanks for that update.

We are hearing that the start of the big murder trial in Portsmouth has been delayed. We can go live to our reporter in Portsmouth for the latest".

"Yes, the start here has been delayed by an application being heard in Chambers, but this trial should be due to start within the next thirty minutes or so. Don't forget, it's live on Sky Courts 1 and Sky Courts 1HD.

With that, it's back to the studio".

"Thanks for that update, and as you heard, it's our featured trial on our Sky Courts 1 channels. You can also see the continuing burglary trial in Newcastle Crown Court on Sky Courts 2, whilst Sky Courts 3 will be showing you events as they unfold from Court No 3 in Leicester.

Coming up after the break, our new "Briefs, Close and Personal" series continues with a barrister who will surprise you with his after court activities. Stay tuned to Sky Courts News, your number one source for Open Justice in Britain".

Royal Junk Mail

Dear Royal Mail

I have signed up to the Mail Preference Service; you might have heard of it. It's a service that tells people that I don't want to receive any junk mail. That includes the advertising leaflets that you are paying the postie to shove through my letterbox on an almost daily basis. This money-grabbing opportunity you have taken on really smacks of desperation. Is distributing advertising really the way to make up for a naff service, and more convenient methods of communication?

I don't need to be told that Pizza Hut and Dominoes are in competition on Tuesdays, offering more pizza than me and the hubby could eat. Similarly, I have never, ever been into a Farm Foods store. The leaflet that came through my door will not persuade me otherwise; in fact it went straight into the recycling bin.

So thanks for cluttering up my doormat with more useless crap. I might well start reciprocating by shoving it all into your pillar boxes.

Yours etc etc

P Doff

Aylestone Meadows

Aylestone Meadows is a nature reserve situated approximately 2-3 miles from Leicester city centre. It is located next to the old Great Central Railway, near to the River Soar and the Grand Union canal, and gives local residents somewhere green and tranquil to walk, jog, run or cycle, away from the hustle and bustle of the traffic and everyday suburban/city life. Being in the southern part of the Soar Valley, the area is susceptible to flooding, however the main paths have been designed to accommodate this.

The area plays host to an disused velodrome to the north, and to the west, an empty school. Neither are affected by any flooding, and are easily accessible to the public. Leicester City Council has decided it wants to build a number of artificial football pitches, complete with club house, changing facilities and car parking. It is already in the process of building pitches close to the old velodrome, but the city, apparently needs more.

Both the velodrome or the school would be ideal locations for these new pitches, however according Leicester City, in its ultimate wisdom, the best location is bang smack in the middle of the nature reserve. Not only will they need to create access, but no doubt the area requires significant work done to prevent the new pitches from flooding. One can only assume that the old school and bike track are going to be sold off for residential development, with the short-sighted council rubbing its hands at the thought of the millions it could raise by selling this land.

Will the money raised from selling land to developers be used to stave off cuts to front line services? I doubt it. It will be needed to pay to make a natural flood plain into a playable surface for football teams that will soon be inundated with pitches to choose from.

In the mean time, those local (and not so local) residents who enjoy the peace and quiet of the nature reserve will be forced to use smaller recreation areas.  Leicester City Council has proposed 'giving' land to angry residents, but these are small pockets that are already being used for other purposes (a horse charity, being one), or are further away and not so accessible to the residents of Aylestone (Glen Parva). 

It also goes without saying that there will be irreparable damage to the habitat and local wildlife, and Leicester City Council doesn't appear to have taken that into perspective.

Leicester City Council has shown time and time again that its attitude towards local planning is both short-sighted and backwards thinking. If it's not demolishing historical buildings that give our city character, and replacing them with monstrosities, then it seeks to take away any green space it has. Oh look, there's some land, let's build on it.

If you wish to speak against this development, you have until the 16th March to do so. To make a comment, follow the guidelines set out here.