The Deep Dive into candidate responses to our Healthy Streets asks.

Last week we published the responses we got from candidates in the 2026 local elections to our asks to improve our streets. We got some interesting replies from the candidates so in this post we’re going to give our take on the answers we got.

Just as a reminder, here are the asks, and you can see the full responses in this post.

1. Fill in the gaps in cycle lanes on Blackhorse Lane and Billet Road adding more safe crossings on BH Lane.

2. Reduce non-local through-traffic on Higham Hill Road and Priory Court, developing a low-traffic scheme for both areas.

3. Prioritise pedestrians on pavements - Remove/redesign pavement parking and street clutter giving pavements back to people.

We’d like to thank the candidates that did respond to our asks. Even if we don’t agree with everything a candidate believes, the time they took to reply to us is to their credit.

Conversely,we’re disappointed that Conservative and Reform didn’t take time to reply to us, even if it was to tell us that they don’t plan to implement any healthy streets measures. It’s a fundamental part of democracy that candidates are open about what they plan to do so that voters can make an informed choice, and ignoring the real concerns of voters shows a shocking level of disrespect. That said, the Conservatives have published a short manifesto on their website so we’ll comment on that from a healthy streets perspective too.

Here’s our commentary on each response.

William Morris and Higham Hill Green Party candidates.

Overall, these are positive responses from the Green Party candidates, as you would expect. However, we see some weaknesses in the level of detail, with a particular concern being the lack of specific answers on plans for delivery. We know that ambition is one thing, but what matters is how you’re going to make things happen and on this the Greens need to up their game. Maybe this comes from their inexperience in local government, but we would have wanted to see more confidence in their ability to deliver results. Councillors only get four years to deliver and much of that can be eaten up by distractions caused by opposition to local schemes. Also, each day that the council allows road danger to remain is another day where someone’s health or life is at risk.

Here’s our commentary on some of lines we thought stood out:

Thanks Higham Hill Healthy Streets and Mums for Lungs for your work. The health of our community is an absolute priority for me and the other two local Green Party candidates in these elections. 

Absolutely spot on with ambition but please get the name of your recipients right. Mums for Lungs had nothing to do with our local asks!

I’m still learning the technical aspects of policies and specialist knowledge but what I can guarantee is that we’ll listen to your expertise and learn the best ways to get your aims actioned. 

Listening is good, but be confident and don’t highlight the gaps in your knowledge! Instead tell us that you’ll be working hard to get these issues resolved!

Higham Hill has already seen the benefits of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and School Streets, Parklets and cycle parking. 

Good recognition of the positive impact that changes to street design can have. Would have been nice to have pointed to specific examples though. 

Major construction work will increase traffic pollution, potentially further jeopardise road safety with heavy construction vehicles and cause other types of pollution such as VOCs and noise.

Absolutely right to flag these issues, but the much bigger problem right now is irresponsible driving, speeding and dangerous parking. Don’t be afraid to call this out. 

If elected, I will work to build on this progress by supporting the expansion of School Streets in our area, ensuring more children can travel to school safely and breathe cleaner air.

This wasn’t one of our asks, and the only two primaries  now without school streets are Whittingham and Roger Ascham. Would have been nice to see a plan to implement these two schemes, even if it’s just a recognition that they both have problems at pick up and drop off times.

I recognise the contribution of domestic wood burning to local pollution. I will push for stronger local action, including public awareness campaigns and appropriate enforcement, alongside support for cleaner alternatives. 

All great, but not relevant to what we asked for.

Louise Ashcroft 

Higham Hill Green Party Candidate 

Overall, we’d give Louise’s answer a solid B+. Great for ambition and definitely the right starting point, but please do address our specific asks with practical ideas for how to make them happen, even if you have to change plans if you come to power.

Robyn Page - William Morris candidate

I'd love to sign up to your election pledges please! 

All 3 of the pledges are causes already very close to my heart as one of your neighbours. I want to see Higham Hill road given the same treatment as other parades in our borough, prioritising pedestrians and making it a proper local destination, not just a rat run with dangerous driving and pavement mounting.

Great ambition here and exactly what we want to hear.

I also recognise that where other areas of the borough have strong traffic reduction and calming measures implemented, our area has been left behind.

Like this too.

If I'm elected I will advocate for our area and champion the best possible improvements for pedestrians and cyclists, and reducing non-local vehicle traffic.

Would have been nice to see more detail on how Robyn wants to make this happen, but we agree with the general ambition.

Overall, we’ll give Robyn a B+. That’s not a reflection of the intention, but more that the response was so short and didn’t give any detail on how to implement our asks. We appreciate that elections are busy and gruelling though so we won’t always get full details, but it’s something to bear in mind when engaging with voters. Robyn later publicly supported all three of our asks with a great online post, something no other candidate has done individually and so we can upgrade her response to an A.

Response from William Morris and Higham Hill Labour Party candidates.

This response is a group response, receiving support from all Labour party candidates in Higham Hill and William Morris. Overall we were really pleased with this response, and even though we didn’t ask for commentary on the other parties’ positions, that’s just the reality of election campaigning. 

We have to give this answer an A. Engaging with our asks, giving details as to implementation, showing a knowledge of what is and isn’t possible and even being willing to go further. We would have given an A+ but for the slightly over the top political attacks on opponents. No need for that, we can see for ourselves who is and isn’t going to deliver. But apart from that, whoever wrote this could teach Keir Starmer a thing or two about political messaging ;-)  

If Labour councillors are returned, we’ll hold them accountable for delivering all of this.

"Dear Healthy Streets Higham Hill & Lloyd Park

Thank you for your email regarding support for your 3 'Election Asks'.

 As you know under the Labour Administration in Waltham Forest support for initiatives that improves the priority and safety of vulnerable road users and ‘active travellers’ has been a priority for well over 12 years. We continue to be widely recognised as one of the leading councils subsequently in London, the UK and even internationally for our political leadership and innovative and pioneering approach.

In short, we support fully your 3 'asks' and then some and our Manifesto makes that clear.

Whilst all the other political parties active in Waltham Forest have not offered support for low traffic neighbourhoods, dedicated cycling infrastructure, prioritising people over parking and enabling more people to choose active and sustainable travel choices, over the many years that Waltham Forest Labour has, we have literally worn our colours on our sleeves and proudly ploughed on delivering schemes and initiatives across all of these areas, that put the needs of people first.

The only thing that has slowed or stopped our work and progress has been access to funding and therefore capacity to deliver. However, in William Morris Ward we have delivered a large low traffic neighbourhood during this administration and in Higham Hill Ward we have invested in a major public realm scheme in Sutherland Rd and one of our largest ‘School Streets’ for the residential streets impacted by the Eden Girls School, as well as making further attempts- with more to come- to respond to the challenges on Higham Hill Rd around the shopping parade and Whittingham Primary School. Ward councillors have been proud and proactive advocates for this work and have been talking to residents on the doorstep, at consultations and at regular ward meetings for the last four years, even when that has been very difficult.

Cllr Clyde Loakes, recently publicly announced (see below) the priorities for the coming years for funding and he made clear reference to a ‘neighbourhood scheme in Higham Hill’ which should be read to address your ‘Ask 2’ and regarding Priory Court we have always said that cannot be considered or addressed until the significant works at Priory Court had been concluded, but we can commit to coming back to that. 

In that same announcement he made a clear reference to ‘upgrading’ and ‘filling in the gaps’ regarding Billet Rd which should be read to address your ‘Ask 1’ and will also include Blackhorse Lane. This is recognised as being long overdue.

Regarding ‘Ask 3’- as we roll out all of our schemes including those mentioned above, as well as in other schemes and those we have already undertaken in Higham Hill and William Morris, we will continue to review historic and outdated approaches that negatively impact the needs of pedestrians and active travel including pavement parking and excessive parking opportunities. Our work as part of the Sutherland Rd Scheme is recent testament to this approach.

We’re really pleased to see direct engagement with the asks, plus a realistic assessment of what isn’t possible on Priory Court. This shows real engagement with the issues and avoids the risk of overpromising what can’t be delivered.

Going further we are also looking at how we can work with schools, residents, parents and carers to introduce ‘School Streets’ for those schools in and around William Morris and Higham Hill Wards, that are not currently part of such powerful behaviour changing schemes. As well as continuing to proactively campaign and lobby for powers for local councils to be able to enforce 20mph and for laws and enforcement around pedestrian crossings to be dramatically improved and modernised.

Going beyond our asks - excellent.

Higham Hill Lib Dem Candidates

Again, positive answers and we like that they’ve engaged with each ask, but the qualified response to ask 2 begs questions about whether the Lib Dems are trying too hard to please everyone. There’s consultation, and then there’s getting bogged down in endless consultation as you try to please everyone before giving in to the loudest and most aggressive voices. 

We should also add that this ‘final’ response was the result of a bit of back and forth as we initially had to correct some extremely disturbing errors in earlier drafts, including the use of discredited misinformation on healthy streets. We appreciate the corrections, but we do expect candidates to be more on top of their briefs. 

Overall, this answer gets a C.

Dear Healthy Streets Team,

Our final response in support of your three pledges is as follows:

1. We fully support filling the gaps in the cycle lanes on Blackhorse Lane and Billet Road. A cycle network is only as strong as its weakest link; gaps that filter onto the road at pinch points and busy junctions discourage all but the most confident cyclists. Our delivery plan will include lobbying for the immediate allocation of the Community Infrastructure Levy funds to prioritise connecting these missing links. We will also push for signal-controlled crossings on Blackhorse Lane, ensuring that children and less-mobile residents can cross safely to reach local green spaces, schools and amenities. 

Nice, specific response plus a plan for delivery.

2. We support the principle of low-traffic schemes for Higham Hill and Priory Court. As Liberal Democrats we will undertake an extensive consultation with residents and involve them with any plans, rather than impose them from above. We’ll pay particular attention to the needs and safety of children, the elderly and those with mobility issues.

Leaving aside the hanging sentence at the end, this is where the response falls down. Agreement in principle with no plan for delivery, just consultation is far less than we want to see. The council already has robust consultation procedures, so no need to reinvent the wheel on this. If you agree with the principle, tell us what and how you want to deliver.

3. Waltham Forest has a 'red' rating for the poor quality of its pavements. We would invest in and improve the pavement inspection programme so that trip hazards are fixed as a matter of urgency.

Where the clear pedestrian space on pavements is below the recommended 2 metres, we support the removal/ re-design of pavement parking and street clutter. Pavements are essential infrastructure, especially for those in wheelchairs, with double buggies, and those with visual impairments.

We will work, with resident consent, to replace chaotic pavement parking with designated safe-bays where necessary, while prioritising the planting of street trees and the installation of more bike hangars.

A solid response, but the ‘resident consent’ part has us worried. Does that mean that one loud objection can scupper a scheme? We hope not.

And the rest …

The Conservative position on healthy streets

So although we sent an email to the Conservative Party that we sent it to all the other candidates, we never received a response from them, so we don’t know for sure what their answers are. To not respond to a good-faith question about a party’s policies, especially on one which concerns people’s lives and health is downright disrespectful, and poor political practice. Candidates are meant to engage in debate and try to win people over to their point of view, not run away from scrutiny through silence.

However, we can comment on some points of their ‘Contract’ on their website.

Overall, it’s a set of ambitions which will only lead to more pollution, danger, injury and death on the roads. It’s disappointing to see what was once the ‘natural party of government’ prioritising debunked conspiracy theories over people’s lives. Overall mark of F for this.

Restore 15 minutes free parking & stop the war on motorists.

Free parking? We thought that the Conservatives were the party of Adam Smith free markets, not for Venezuelan-style subsidies to make scarce resources artificially cheap! This classic Economist article gives a great overview of why there’s no such thing as ‘free’ parking.

And the ‘war on the motorist’? What does this even mean? Will they stop enforcing traffic rules? More speeding? More drug driving? This so-called ‘war’ has been known to be a myth for decades (see this report for a detailed piece of research into it) and this line gets dangerously close to conspiracy theory.

Stop LTN projects and fix our roads and pavements instead.

By ‘stopping’ LTNs, does that mean to remove existing ones like the roads around Priors Croft, allowing east-west through traffic? Or rip out the Mini Holland measures in Walthamstow Village that were funded by Conservative mayor Boris Johnson? And since LTNs reduce overall levels of motor traffic, surely that means that they reduce the amount of wear and tear on the roads, so that we need to spend less on fixing pot holes? So this line means that they’ll spend less on reducing traffic and more on fixing the damage caused by higher traffic. Overall, this line is contradictory and doesn’t seem very well thought out.

Invest in mobile CCTV for every ward to fight ASB and fly tipping.

We’re assuming that this doesn’t mean CCTV or speed cameras to catch people driving dangerously or anti socially, although we’ll be happy to be corrected on this.

Reform’s non-response

And then there’s Reform. We sent an email to them on the same day that we sent it to all the other candidates, we never received a response from them, so we don’t know for sure what their answers are. To not respond to a good-faith question about a party’s policies, especially on one which concerns people’s lives and health is downright disrespectful, and poor political practice. Candidates are meant to engage in debate and try to win people over to their point of view, not run away from scrutiny through silence.

Since Reform UK seems to have no policy at all to encourage healthy streets, they’ll have to receive a U.