Labour council denies being ‘anti-ice cream' despite van ban plans
A Labour-run council has denied being 'anti-ice cream' over plans to restrict their sale in some streets.
The Royal Borough of Greenwich in London wants to ban itinerant ice cream vans from trading in more than 30 roads in the area, including King William Walk, a popular tourist site near the Royal Observatory.
But the plans have faced opposition from the likes of father-of-seven Paul St Hilaire Sr, who has been selling ice creams in the borough for 30 years.
He previously challenged the ban at Bromley magistrates' court, which last August ordered the council to rerun its consultation into the proposals. The case cost taxpayers £52,000.
However, the ban is now expected to shortly be approved at a full council meeting after 16 local organisations and residents vote in favour during the new consultation, with nine opposed.
The council said the restrictions were needed in King William Walk because ice cream queues were blocking the path for pedestrians, particularly causing problems for the elderly, the disabled and those with pushchairs.
Residents have also raised concerns about pollution from the vans, which keep their engines running to power their machines even while at a standstill.
Cllr Pat Slattery, the authority's cabinet member for neighbourhoods, told a recent council meeting: 'I think it is important to say that the council is not anti-ice cream. There are ice cream vendors in a reasonable spit of where this ice cream van regularly parks up.'
Cllr Anthony Okereke, leader of the council, added: 'We are not banning ice creams in Greenwich in any way, shape or form. We do love an ice cream, actually.'
Ban 'ludicrous'
However, Susan Hall, a Conservative London Assembly member, described the ban as 'ludicrous'.
She told The Telegraph: 'The council should rethink this policy. Are they all hell-bent on destroying any fun in Sadiq Khan's London?'
In documents seen by The Telegraph, one local said they feared exhaust fumes were damaging the health of people living nearby, with some ice cream vans keeping their engines running for up to eight hours a day.
Another complained the vans blocked views of the area's World Heritage Site, while also contributing to noise pollution caused by their chimes.
The University of Greenwich was among the groups to support the restrictions. It said King William Walk was an 'unsuitable location' for ice cream vans because of the obstruction caused to traffic and pedestrians, while also warning that they 'affect local businesses'.
Mr St Hilaire Sr has previously accused the council of wanting to 'stop genuine competition'.
He told the Local Democracy Reporting Service last year: 'I've been doing my business for 30 years, I've raised a family. I have all my children that are here working and providing services for the wider community. All I want is to be able to sell my ice cream.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
26 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Hamilton by-election prompts rethink of assumptions about 2026 Holyrood elections
John Swinney said it was a two-horse race between the SNP and Reform UK; some commentators claimed Reform might just sneak it; and Labour was tipped to finish third. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... But when the votes were counted in last week's Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election, it was Labour who emerged as the winners with a majority of 602, overturning the SNP's majority of more than 4,500 in 2021 - a swing of 7.42 per cent from the SNP to Labour. Amid poor poll ratings,and after the party's humiliation in last month's Runcorn and Helsby by-election, where it lost the seat to Reform, this was a major boost for Labour. Labour's Davy Russell celebrates with Anas Sarwar, Jackie Ballie and Monica Lennon after winning the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. Picture: Jeff| Getty Images Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad And with the Scottish Parliament elections less than a year away, it prompts a rethink of the assumption that the SNP is on course for a fifth term in power at Holyrood. Labour's landslide general election victory last July encouraged hopes that Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar could oust John Swinney as First Minister and end nearly two decades of SNP rule next May. But a series of unpopular decisions by the new Labour government at Westminster, including means-testing winter fuel payments, led to plummeting poll figures and seemed to put paid to the party's chances in Scotland. Reacting to the Hamitlon result, Mr Sarwar claimed it showed a rejection of the SNP because of its record in Government, as well as a rejection of Nigel Farage and Reform. But he also acknowledged people wanted the UK Labour government to 'go further and faster in making a difference to people's lives'. The SNP's continuing poll lead after18 years in government cannot be easily dismissed and Reform's 26 per cent of the vote shows it is a serious threat, but Labour nevertheless has good reason to be heartened by the Hamilton victory. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Commentators have warned against reading too much into the win and rightly point out the parties' performances in Hamilton were roughly in line with Scotland-wide polling which shows SNP support 15 points down on the 2021 Holyrood election and Labour support two points down. But the fact remains that Labour has won a fiercely-fought by-election which they were widely expected to lose badly and have taken a seat from the SNP who were seen as more or less certain victors next year. And that gives Labour a new momentum in their drive to win power at Holyrood.
Daily Record
42 minutes ago
- Daily Record
Chancellor's U-turn restoring winter fuel payments to millions of pensioners is the correct decision
Setting the new cut-off point at £35,000 seems reasonable and allows the UK Government to claw black cash given to the wealthiest. But the original policy last year to slash the WFP to all but the poorest pensioners should never have happened. Labour should always be the party that looks out for people on low and modest incomes. They should never be taking money from people who need it and linking the WFP to pension credit was appalling. Voters had waited a long time for a Labour government to pursue bold policies. They wanted Keir Starmer to dismantle the Tory legacy on welfare, not undo the policies of Gordon Brown. But this disastrous mis-step overshadowed the early days of the Government and triggered a loss of trust in Starmer. The Starmer administration has steadily improved from its rocky early period and progress is being made on a range of fronts. The package on employment rights is excellent and trade deals with the US and EU should boost growth. Starmer has also proven himself to be a serious politician who thinks carefully before acting. But his Government has to learn lessons from the WFP debacle. It opened the door to Nigel Farage and allowed him to falsely portray himself as a man of the people. This Labour government can be a resounding success but it must close the door on future blunders. Sextortion fight Social media has much to commend it, connecting like-minded people with shared interests across the globe. But there is often a significant downside to the platforms we all use. They can be a tool for bullies and the unscrupulous who seek to exploit vulnerable or impressionable people for their own gain. Sextortion, a form of online blackmail using real or fake images taken from social media, has been used by criminals to terrify young people into parting with cash or be publicly shamed. A campaign to raise awareness of sextortion and how to deal with it has been launched by the youth service Fearless. It urges young people not to panic, not to pay and to seek help. It is sad that in this day and age such a campaign is necessary. And much like our own Our Kids... Our Future campaign, it acknowledges the pressures young people are under in today's Scotland. But while youngsters are becoming more aware of sextortion, perhaps the social media companies could do more to keep them safe online.
Belfast Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Belfast Telegraph
UK has one of ‘worst statutory leave offers for fathers in developed world'
In a new report, the House of Commons committee said a maximum of two weeks' paternity leave is 'completely out of step with how most couples want to share their parenting responsibilities' and 'entrenches outdated gender stereotypes about caring'. The committee has urged the Government to either amend the Employment Rights Bill to legislate for a day one right to paid leave or commit to 'considering this vital change within its review' in consultation with employers. It has also called on the Government to consider raising paternity pay to the level of maternity pay in the first six weeks – 90% of average earnings. The paternity and shared parental leave report by the committee said working parents 'will be let down by a review that leads only to tinkering around the edges of the system'. Chairwoman of the Women and Equalities Committee Sarah Owen said the UK's parental leave system was in 'urgent need of an overhaul to fit with the reality of working parents' lives'. The Labour MP for Luton North said reform 'must start with longer and better paid paternity leave'. Ms Owen said: 'It's essential the Government's proposed review addresses the system's fundamental failings, including low statutory pay, inadequate leave periods for fathers and others, exclusion of many working parents and guardians, plus design flaws and unnecessary complexity in the Shared Parental Leave scheme. 'The UK's parental leave system has fallen far behind most comparable countries, and we now have one of the worst statutory leave offers for fathers and other parents in the developed world.' The Labour MP added: 'Ministers must commit to meaningful reforms in the medium-term, with a view to going further towards a more gender equal parental leave system. 'Tinkering around the edges of a broken system will let down working parents. While much-needed substantial change to our paid parental leave system will require considerable financial investment, this would be outweighed by wider societal and economic benefits.' The report states that the UK's rate of statutory parental pay is 'completely out of kilter with the cost of living, has not kept pace with inflation and is far below rates in most comparable countries'. It recommends phased introduction of increases to statutory pay across the system to bring rates for all working parents up to 80% or more of average earnings or the real Living Wage. The lack of provision for self-employed fathers is 'deeply unfair', the report adds. The committee recommends that the Government consider options for providing statutory paid leave for all self-employed working fathers as part of its review of the parental leave system, including introducing a paternity allowance for self-employed fathers and other parents, similar to maternity allowance. The report states that the shared parental leave system is 'extremely difficult for most parents and their employers to understand'. It said a forthcoming review must examine the function and necessity of eligibility rules, with a view to 'simplifying or removing the employment status, time in service and earnings criteria'. The committee said the review should examine approaches taken in overseas systems, including the German 'partnership bonus' and Portugal's 'sharing bonus', which provide additional paid leave to couples in which both parents take a substantial portion of leave while the other returns to paid work.
