On Tuesday, January 30, I wrote to East Sussex County Council (ESCC), copying Sally-Ann Hart MP. I wrote on behalf of a Facebook group that, at the time, had about 800+ members. It’s called “Hastings and Rother Potholes – The Great Zig-Zag Drive”, and it does what it says on the tin! It’s a forum for discussion of our dangerous and dilapidated roads. Founded by Jacqueline Morrison, it now numbers 1,600 members and is buzzing with enquiry and exasperation every day.
The letter I wrote was kindly reproduced by Rye News. It took a while to get a response from ESCC, but when I received one, it was informative but essentially defensive, as is perhaps understandable. I don’t aim to be a spokesman for Conservative-run ESCC, but since you and I are encountering potholes every day, I expect you’d like to know the council’s responsibilities. So I’ve tried to boil it all down, below.
The ESCC letter stated that 20,000 potholes have been repaired this year and that three times as many gangs are deployed fixing them. The letter also highlighted that the council is not required by law to repair all potholes and defects, as that would be “prohibitively expensive” and “place an even greater burden on taxpayers.” The logic stands, but I know many people will also feel purchasing a new tyre or getting their tracking re-aligned is also a ‘great burden’…
Nonetheless, officers at ESCC have a job to do and criteria to apply. Some of these were also outlined and may be of interest. The new contractor, Balfour Beatty Living Places (BBLP) were awarded a £297m contract last spring, and have signed up to quality assurance guarantees and a commitment to ‘right first time’ repairs. BBLP monitor their own work and ESCC highways stewards have oversight too, with major roads being inspected once a month and lesser roads being inspected once every six months. You and I augment this scheme by reporting defects and potholes too.
There’s also a new technique for repairs, whereby the contractor cuts out a square from the tarmac a minimum distance of 250mm from the ragged edge of the hole. This is supposed to be sealed at the edges and is apparently a more robust fix. So, when you see a square patch, this should be a recent repair using the new technique. These ‘square repairs’ differ from temporary emergency repairs, which should be marked with a ‘T’. A permanent repair should be made within 28 days. Once a repair has been completed, that is guaranteed by the contractor for 52 weeks. If the repair fails in this time, the contractor is liable for that re-repair at their own cost. So, the taxpayer doesn’t pay at that point, but naturally, that cost will have been factored in to BBLP’s contract offer to ESCC. In effect, we have already paid. The question is, are we getting value for money? That is a very, very hard question to answer. But the research of Pete Munro, Clive Meekham and Richard Telford, other members of the Hastings Potholes group, does perhaps give some cause for concern…
The civic minded trio have been diligently monitoring the state of potholes in the area, particularly those that have been repaired. Last week Mr Munro posted a photo which depicted a recently repaired pothole between Three Oaks and Westfield. The pristine repair was photographed on ‘Day 1’ and dated 15th Feb. Over the coming days, successive photos were taken at days three, six and nine in the life of the repaired pothole. By day nine, the surface was already crazed and broken and it was clear that it would very soon require repairing again. This, it should be said, was a ‘square repair’ of the type we’re told is more durable. It was not sealed at the edges, however. So, are repairs being made effectively? Are the new quality assurance standards sufficiently rigorous? And are they being upheld? We owe thanks to Mr Munro and his colleagues for highlighting these questions, which will hopefully hasten a resolution.
In the meantime, in a cost of living crisis, having to shell out for a new tyre for our indispensable cars is not something any of us want to contemplate. The claims process has understandably, therefore, been much discussed. The council’s actions are governed by the Highways Act 1980, and there’s a statutory duty with respect maintenance and a statutory defence against claims. This is how it works.
If ESCC can show that they have taken “reasonable care” to maintain the highway in a condition that is safe for users by carrying out robust inspections, it cannot be held liable. If ESCC were not aware of a defect again, it cannot be held liable. If it may be proven that ESCC was aware and did not repair the defect in a specified time, it may be held liable. So only where there’s proven negligence or breach of a statutory duty is ESCC liable. That’s why it’s imperative to keep reporting holes and to retain the proof of the report. It doesn’t take long, and can be done here: https://live.eastsussexhighways.com/report-problem/making-claim-east-sussex-highways
The other crucial aspect is the role of central government, and in particular, levels of funding. In response to my letter, I received a polite note from the office of Sally-Ann Hart MP. It comprised the usual smokescreen of impenetrable raw data that seems to pass for political communication these days. A list of large numbers is rarely illuminating, particularly as some seemed contradictory and others didn’t immediately tally with what was in the Conservative literature landing on our doorsteps. Moreover, it doesn’t matter how much has been spent, and how much is promised, because even the most colossal sum seem utterly insignificant in contrast to our everyday driving reality. That reality tells us that things have been allowed to deteriorate to such an extent that remedial works clearly cannot be made fast enough. We’re left with roads that are dangerous to vehicles, cyclists, bikers and pedestrians. When the tourists arrive to visit our beautiful medieval town, they’ll be confronted with shameful medieval roads too. It’s the same in Hastings and surrounding areas.
Tellingly, the one question I did not have addressed by either ESCC or Mrs Hart was, this: what is the long term strategy to address this problem? I acknowledge that weather is already an issue and likely to be a bigger one in coming years, but throwing money at the problem just before an election is not a strategic response. It is emblematic of the short-term, quick fix, partisan mentality that confounds Britain. We need to get back to consensus politics and long term policy development and implementation. But that will never be achieved with our winner-takes-all electoral system. We need politics with generational vision that prioritise people, not the fortunes of political parties.
A shovel full of asphalt in the hole may be cheaper in the short term, but in the long run it’s a road to ruin. This coming election, we have the opportunity to stop the traffic and fix the road for good.
Email: ryeguylibdem@gmail.com
Instagram: guyharris_libdem
Image Credits: Robert Dalton , Pete Munro .
I find it impossible to disagree with Guy’s last two paragraphs. I certainly agree that we lack sound long term strategic planning, and generational policy objectives, effectively and competently implemented. I so much agree that we should be working together in consensus for community benefit, not stuck in a battle for partisan advantage in an adversarial system. Thank you Guy, it’s good to have these things pointed out.
My QUESTION is, and always has been, how do we get to that happy state? Not in theory, however sound, but in practice – and preferably in my lifetime!
Thank you, Bob. To my mind it cannot be achieved without changing the electoral system to one which actually represents the views of voters and diminishes the power of centralised political parties. I know I bang on about this, but if we have a system that routinely elects governments that speak for 35-40% of those who actually turn up to vote, our voice doesn’t matter. In 2019 22m votes effectively made no difference. Is it any wonder people think they’re better off turning to social media and street protest than engaging in democracy? It’s the votes of zealots, activists and interest groups who the political parties chase bcs they’re noisy and they vote. They skew the debate and set us against one another, abetted by a media that needs simple binary narratives for its daily news output. It’s not complicated, it’s definitely not utopian, we can fix this. But not until we have fair votes. Alas, the Conservative and Labour turkeys won’t vote for Christmas. LibDems support fair votes. So, send a message. Vote strategically, not tactically. Especially if we’re going to have a Labour PM whatever we do…
I read this article with a growing affinity with what was written. Yes, the roads are in a parlous state. Yes, the damage to vehicles is an additional expense to even the most careful of drivers. Yes, we can watch the roads deteriorating with our own eyes.
The statement ‘that weather is already an issue and likely to be a bigger one in coming years’ is somewhat odd. Some years ago it was frost, ice and snow that was to blame for potholes. Now it appears that rain and a few frosty nights are to blame.
If it is beyond the abilities of Highway Engineers to construct roads that cannot accommodate the rainfall that is expected in southern England, there appears to be a basic problem.
When ESCC state that 20,000 potholes have been repaired this year it is necessary to ask what the word ‘repaired’ actually means.
If ESCC have nearly £300 million to spend on road maintenance we, as road users, expect a far greater return on what is our money. The shoddy experience that we currently have to suffer is not acceptable
I also agree. It’s blindingly obvious to anyone with any sense that our potholes are symptoms of roads no longer able to cope with increased traffic and wetter winters. So the solution is a strategy, that of progressively rebuilding our roads to a higher standard. We could start by calculating the fiscal and environmental costs of acting vs. not acting, couldn’t we? As drivers we all know the costs of repairing the damage and replacing the tyres, so I don’t think anyone will argue that they love the roads as they are. So, who can we call on to start the ball rolling?
The contractors who dug holes in the newly resurfaced A259 on the west side of Strand Quay, Rye, should be made to come back and repair them properly. It is now a case of poor repairs being made to previous poor repairs.
I do wonder when you drive into Kent the roads seem to magically get better, I wonder what contractors the use?
Just to counter – I reported a pothole to ESCC online yesterday. It was big, pretty deep, filled with water and on a single carriageway road, so difficult to avoid. I didn’t exaggerate but on clicking ‘send’ a message popped up advising me that the situation sounded dangerous and advised me to call, which I did. The call was answered very quickly and incredibly – within two hours a team fhad attended and fixed the pothole. I have emailed and expressed my appreciation because I bet the teams (currently 30 county wide) don’t get too many thanks!
Nobody seems to mention the fact that vehicles are becoming larger and heavier. This alone must impact on the longevity of any road surface. The family car now encroaches on 2 parking bays but they only pay for one. Don’t blame it all on the weather!
I notice today that the contractor finished work near Whitegates care home on the outskirts of Westfield, I have lost count how many times the area has been attended, this time the surface has been sealed, what cost for those several visits?
The bottom line is that many of our roads are simply not safe, if you are a cyclist, the macadam surrounding road drains is no more!, and because legislation governs what depth a pothole has to be for it to be attended too, there is clearly a safety issue. Driving a car now, attention is now to look for ‘potholes’, in the interests of safety for road traffic and pedestrians.No doubt insurance costs will increase also in the future.
Ian Jenkins raises an issue, by saying ‘Driving a car now, attention is now to look for ‘potholes’,’.
Yes drivers are, of necessity, looking at the road surface a short distance ahead, rather than scanning the road into the distance so that they are aware of developing hazards. As this style of driving becomes the norm, collisions with stationary vehicles and pedestrians will become more prevalent. A result of atrocious road surface conditions.
Another danger is that of damaged tyres. An incident with a pothole that deflates a tyre is generally sudden and known by the driver. A drop into a pothole that causes a sharp judder is likely to damage the structure of the tyre with no immediate noticeable effect on the driving of the vehicle but the tyre could then fail unexpectedly – possibly at speed.
As Bernadine points out, the ESCC pothole reporting system (online) now actually requires a phone call to be made when reporting a large pothole. This is a change from the earlier, simpler system, which I feel many people preferred. Another problem lies in actually estimating the size and depth of any pothole. You can’t jump into the road with a tape measure. One thing that has not been mentioned is the appalling condition of private (non-adopted) roads in Rye. For example, if anyone wishes to view the biggest, deepest potholes in Rye, they need go no further than St Margaret’s Terrace. Maintenance of private roads does not fall under the local council, which leads to years of neglect and the inevitable consequences of this.