I went to a meeting tonight of the rather grandly-named Broadfield Forum. The forum is an attempt to rescue something constructive from a failed community engagement initiative.

Originally there was a plan to split Broadfield into a number of smaller areas and for each area to have a group of interested citizens who would form a group and meet up with each other to discuss matters of interest to that area. The meetings would be facilitated by a council officer from the community services department, and other people would be invited as appropriate – councillors, police, highway services, council amenities service, etc. etc. These groups were called ‘Link groups’ because once a year, or maybe twice, there would be a meeting with a couple of representatives from each link group (they would link together). It was a pilot project, and when it was launched Broadfield had a community support officer dedicated to the neighbourhood. If it all worked, it would be repeated in the rest of the town.

Unfortunately, only two link groups really got going. A third almost started but nobody was willing to chair it. In the meantime the council’s budgets meant that there was no chance of every neighbourhood getting its own support officer, in fact the Broadfield one started having to cover two neighbourhoods. Eventually someone decided it was not worth pursuing, but it seemed like a shame to lose what gains there had been. The few people who were active in the two working link groups were very active and a valuable resource to the community, and it was decided to have a single forum covering the whole neighbourhood, which would keep those people engaged.

One positive aspect is that the council gets to have a list of locals who are likely to help when some project comes along. It is also very good for those few people who have stayed involved: they get to meet with those who are actually delivering services, they get informed about what is going on and they get consulted.

On the negative side, it is only a few people involved, and always the same few. There is no expansion of involvement at all.

The real downside from my point of view is that it is not very representative of the whole neighbourhood. Most attendees come from the old link group areas which are all in the North of the neighbourhood, so most discussion concerns those areas and the shopping parade. Now that Broadfield has been split into two council wards it is even worse, as most of them come from Broadfield North. Perhaps a more accurate name for it would be the Broadfield North Forum.

There really does need to be an effort to stir up interest in Broadfield South and get a bit more equality. We have our problems down here too, and quite frankly, they are being ignored in this forum. One of our councillors lives in Broadfield North and the other right near the shops and they seem to be unaware of the large number of houses up Tollgate Hill.

This is not to knock the participants – they are obviously interested in where they live. Its not really a criticism of the council officers involved either. I know there have been a lot of staff comings and goings and illnesses. They have had a hard enough job keeping what there is going without risking it all by trying to widen the membership, but now things are settling down and its time to start getting serious about the population in the South. I was particularly annoyed at last year’s elections (the one I lost) when the Tories said that reviving the link groups was something they would push for. This was in a leaflet for Broadfield South, but didn’t mention that we had never had a link group in the South – so if the scheme got going again the effect would be to divert resources away from us into Broadfield North.

The topics covered tonight were: a talk from a police inspector about a new police initiative in Broadfield (which concentrates a lot on the shopping parade, and involved a lot of discussion on the travellers who are on the playing fields in the North), a talk by someone from the Barton management company, and an update on a development at Raithlin Road (in the North).

The policeman sounded very positive, although he was laying the macho act on a bit thick. Basically he was saying that he has a team which will not be involved in routine response work, but will be spending six months tackling antisocial behaviour in Broadfield. He was talking about getting tough and not taking any rubbish from youths. When asked by a particularly irate pensioner about how aggresive the police would be he said they would be “more aggressive than you could possibly imagine. and I am not being facetious.” I hope he was being facetious. I was at the poll tax riots in Trafalgar Square, so I can imagine some pretty aggressive policing! I am all in favour of having more public order, but I don’t want ranks of mounted police and the SPG charging people down outside the Imperial.

He seemed OK though, and interestingly, on the topic of travellers he seemed to think that having some sort of official site in Crawley would help him to evict illegally encamped travellers.

The chap from the Barton management company was depressing. Personally he was OK, but it was the news that he brought which was depressing. It seems that the maintenance budget for the parade is not huge – perhaps £15,000 a year or thereabouts. The sort of improvements which most of us would like to see would never be affordable by the company. It looks like the best we can hope for would be a lick of paint for the tatty canopies.

I don’t know how much I want to get involved in this forum as almost the only representative from Broadfield South. If anything at all is achieved through it, I just know that our two tory councillors will leap in and grab the credit. They may be bloody useless generally, but they are very, very good at playing the media. Its ironic when the Labour party always gets accused of being the masters of spin to see that, in Crawley at least, the Tories are extremely good at manipulating the local press – although since it is owned and edited by Tories that is maybe not such a surprise.