The O2 Centre site on Finchley Road

• ACROSS Belsize Park and Swiss Cottage there is significant resentment towards the way Camden Council have refused to consult residents or refused to listen to the outcomes.

And with it happening time and time again, you can’t blame residents for being sceptical about Camden’s claims to engage further on the O2 Centre site.

Chalcots residents face a fourth winter without cladding insulation. Residents thought they were being given a democratic choice as to window design in a consultation in 2018, and the majority of residents told Camden they wanted windows that worked similarly to the existing design: opening outwards.

But Labour refused to listen and reneged on commitments to abide by residents’ choices. They’re now implementing a different design altogether, as part of a hugely expensive redesign that residents just don’t want or need.

On replacing all parking on Haverstock Hill with cycle lanes, Labour refused time and again to consult residents despite the law requiring them to.

That is: until they were sued and were forced to consult residents earlier this year. In that consultation, the vast majority (69 per cent) opposed the plans. But Labour councillors voted in August to disregard the consultation results and proceed with the changes anyway.

And now at the O2 Centre, we see the same discussions again. Camden is proposing rewriting its Local Plan to allow 2,000 flats at the O2 Centre.

Labour clearly don’t want to consult on this. They’ve made that clear time and again, including the cabinet member for planning at October’s council meeting.

Improper, inadequate, or straight-up ignored consultation is Camden’s calling card.

So when they say they’ve delayed adopting the plan for “further engagement”, why would anyone that’s seen what they’ve done at the Chalcots or Haverstock Hill trust that Labour would listen to anything the public says?

NIGEL RUMBLE
Address supplied