Tweet

On the 1st December (World AIDS Day) I decided to order a free HIV home test. I am heterosexual and have been in a monogamous relationship with my partner for 7 years. Even though I am in a low-risk group, I was shocked to read the latest news from the British HIV Association that new diagnoses of HIV in heterosexuals where the infection was probably acquired in the UK is around 50%, almost double 2002 levels.

I ordered my test from https://www.DrEd.com/uk/ who was giving up to 100 away for free because of World AIDS Day. It was fairly easy, I just needed to set up an account and they even offered to inform my GP for me if I wanted them to. On Monday I got an email saying my account had been updated, when I logged in there was a message saying my test had been dispatched.

On Tuesday I came downstairs in the morning to find my test waiting for me in a plain black envelope. I had my breakfast and a cup of coffee, put HBO’s Girls on the TV and still in my pyjamas sat down at my coffee table and opened up the pack. You can see what comes in the pack below:

This is what the package looks like when it comes through the post, pretty inconspicuous really. It fits through the letterbox and there is no way you can tell what it’s about without opening it up.

Once you open it up this is what you will see. There is an instruction booklet, a pre-paid envelope to send it back in, a collection tube, name stickers and 3 mini needles.

All done! Once everything is in the envelope you can post it in any Royal Mail Postbox.

I’ll be honest – I am a complete wimp when it comes to needles. I can do it to somebody else but when it comes to me I can barely look. I spent a good ten minutes with the jabber on my finger counting to 3 repeatedly. I then had to get a fair amount of blood out into the small pot, and ended up having to prick another finger. Ultimately, it wasn’t too bad and I got there in the end.

I know there has been some controversy about HIV home test kits, understandably so. I felt it was appropriate for me for a number of reasons. Firstly, services in Essex are pretty rubbish, and make the process rather lengthy. Secondly, I work in healthcare and have plenty of people I could call on if I am worried/anxious or if the result came back positive. Thirdly, I am fairly low risk, if I had had a risky encounter I may want to speak to somebody about it first, and find out the facts.

When I ordered the test I felt pretty calm about it, and just saw it as an opportunity to raise awareness. However, whilst waiting for the test I have found myself becoming increasingly anxious about the results. Could I still be a nurse if it comes back positive? What if I have infected others without realising it? Who could I have got it from? I was one sleepless night away from planning my medication routine. During this process I researched a fair bit about HIV and found out some interesting facts:

a.) There is a 1.8% chance of catching HIV from a needle-stick injury, not the 100% I assumed it would be.

b.) Significantly fewer people were able to identify correctly the ways in which HIV is transmitted in a 2007 survey than were able to do so seven years earlier.

c.) There are estimated to be 22,600 people living with HIV in the UK who are unaware of their infection. This represents 24% of everyone living with HIV in the UK.

I have come to realise that this is now a chronic, manageable condition, it is no longer the death sentence it once was. I also realised how little I really knew about HIV and how ignorant I was. I find it heart-breaking that people are becoming less aware of HIV, and incredibly worrying that people are becoming less able to correctly identify the ways in which HIV is transmitted.

Whilst I waited for my results I got a phone call from an unknown number, they confirmed they were speaking to Miss Elizabeth Parr, and at that point my heart was in my mouth. Luckily, it was just a call about some work I was doing. It made me realise how nervous I really was about the chance of my results coming back positive though.

On Friday I was lucky enough to have my results come through as negative, which has left me to reflect on my experience of the home-test.
For me, it was fantastic; in total it probably took me 45 minutes to order the test, take it and send it back off. I didn’t have to have any sort of awkward conversations and I didn’t need to tell anybody the result if I didn’t want to. However, had I struggled to get the sample or if it had come back positive, I would feel very differently.

Whilst looking for the test I wanted to take, I also came across home-testing that gives you rapid results, similar to a pregnancy test. Although it would have stopped me having an anxious few days, they are less reliable and had the test come back positive I would have had absolutely no support. I think I would prefer to have an anxious 48 hours than find out that sort of news on my own.

I have learnt a lot about HIV over the past few weeks, and I wish more people would get themselves tested, it is becoming increasingly easier to find out your status. Even though I am low-risk and the result came back negative, I have still learnt a lot through this process. If you’re reading this and don’t know your status, go and get yourself tested! There are no embarrassing conversations, no lectures and it could save you or your partner’s life.

Tweet


Below is a press release from Save Our Villages, a local campaign group which I wholeheartedly support,  following Fairfield’s exhibitions over the past week.

————-

‘Hellsenham’ new town opposed by 99% of residents

The Fairfield Partnership, who hope to build a new town of 3,000 houses between Henham & Elsenham, dubbed ‘Hellsenham’, were dealt a severe blow when they found that the vast majority of local people are opposed to their plans .

Fairfield held a number of exhibitions across Uttlesford, starting in Henham on Saturday 10th November, before going to Stansted, Saffron Walden and Dunmow on 14th, 15th and 16th November, and finishing in Elsenham on the 17th November. At each exhibition, representatives from local campaign group Save Our Village were on-hand to speak to attendees and canvass their opinions. Of the nearly 750 people who went along to have their say, just 6 said that they supported the development.

One of the Save Our Village campaigners was Uttlesford District Councillor Elizabeth Parr, who represents Elsenham & Henham.  After attending all five exhibitions, she said:

“I have spoken to hundreds of people over the past week about Fairfield’s ridiculous plans.  Residents across Uttlesford have had the good sense to see through Fairfield’s misleading suggestion that if they get to build their ‘Hellsenham’ new town, other areas won’t get any housing development – the numbers simply don’t add up.  Local people, whether in Elsenham, Henham, Stansted, Saffron Walden or Dunmow, are smart enough to see this development for what it is – an opportunistic money spinner that will destroy local communities. Fairfield should accept that their proposed development is simply not wanted by anyone and should abandon their plans.”

Save Our Village and Henham Parish Council Chairman Cllr. Nick Baker added:

“This expensive series of exhibitions attracted almost 750 Uttlesford residents, of whom just 6 were in favour of Fairfield’s new town – that’s under 1% of those who attended.  We await the submission of Fairfield’s planning application to Uttlesford District Council in January, and hope that Councillors take on board the strong message sent this week by local people and refuse it, once and for all.  With 99% of residents opposed to it, this must be the single most unpopular development plan in the country!”

Following Uttlesford Lib Dems’ withdrawal from the flawed local plan development process last week, Cllr. David Morson and I met with chief planning officer Andrew Taylor last Friday to discuss the way forward. The following are my notes made after the meeting, and are made to the best of my recollection.

At the beginning of the meeting Cllr. Morson explained to Mr. Taylor that we would like to meet with Cllr. Jim Ketteridge and Chief Executive John Mitchell to discuss some of the constitutional issues surrounding secret meetings, but that we would listen to what he had to say.

He explained that the council ideally want to work with all parties and he was disappointed that the Liberal Democrats had pulled out of the LDF working group, and that he wanted to get us back on board.

When David questioned him about why certain councillors were invited to the (now cancelled) meeting on the 30th of August who were not even part of the LDF working group. His reply was that everybody there had an interest in planning.

We then went on to ask what the purpose of the meeting was, when the LDF working group already exists for the very purpose of working out the details of the local plan. He explained that because the working group has grown in size considerably since 2007, it would be easier to decide on things like wording in a small group. He said he was surprised at the attention the meeting had drawn.

Members of the council have had no official briefing about the first or second part of the consultation, apart from a very long document with little explanation. We explained that we were disappointed that nothing had been fed back to to full council about the previous consultation, and he explained it had been fed back to the LDF working group.

I said I thought that the council hadn’t done enough to explain to the public the outcomes of the first consultation between January and March. He explained that the technical nature of the process makes it difficult to feed the information back to residents.

We were informed that there are currently studies looking into air quality and traffic and these are expected to overrun, therefore it is likely the November consultation will be pushed back to January.

Both David and I are keen to meet with Cllr Ketteridge as soon as possible to discuss our concerns with the secretive and unaccountable nature of the local plan process so far, which appear to be substantiated by what Mr. Taylor told us.

Elsenham's golden post box

Residents in Elsenham have been celebrating Olympic success after Royal Mail painted one of the village’s postboxes gold in honour of gold medal-winning local hero Ben Maher. Ben, who trains at Elsenham Stud Farm, was part of a team of three who won Great Britain’s first showjumping gold medal in 60 years on Monday, in a narrow victory over the Dutch team.

On Monday night’s meeting of Elsenham Parish Council, councillors congratulated Ben on his olympic success. Chairman Nick Edwards said:

“I think I speak for many Elsenham residents in offering huge congratulations to Ben and his fellow Olympians. The village is buzzing at the moment following such a historic success from a local athlete.”

On Tuesday, Royal Mail were initially going to paint the postbox in Bishop’s Stortford’s South Street gold to celebrate Ben’s success, but then had a change of heart. Nick adds:

“Following calls from villagers and the local press asking for a golden postbox in Ben’s home village of Elsenham, Royal Mail agreed to paint our postbox gold. This afternoon, people were crowding round the village’s newly-painted postbox to take photos and revel in our very own Olympic success.”

Cllr. Elizabeth Parr, one of Elsenham’s Uttlesford District Councillors added:

“I want to offer my thanks to Royal Mail for using their local knowledge to ensure that Elsenham didn’t miss out on getting its gold postbox – but the biggest accolades should go to the man himself, Ben Maher, for bringing a little piece of Olympic history to Elsenham.”

Some Labour and Tory MPs will have you believe that Lords reform is a ‘distant and rather archaic constitutional matter’ and that we should be focused on more ‘important’ issues. I find it staggering that any politician would say that democracy is so unimportant they would actively discourage members of the public from engaging in the process.

Yes, Britain is facing many economic problems at the moment, but I feel that this gives us even more of a mandate to make sure that public money is not spent on giving unelected Lords a job for life, regardless of their performance. I think most members of the public would find it sickening that anybody could take a seat in the House of Lords and get paid even if they just turn up to collect their attendance allowance.

Many MPs today have used the argument that Lords reform will leave them with less power. Surely, when looking at fair representation, democracy should come before power? Yes, if Lords were elected it would give them more of a mandate to get involved, but I personally cannot see a downside to that. I have never heard of the masses over-throwing the political elite because there is ‘too much democracy’.

The other argument that many have used is that having a 15 year term would cause Lords to become complacent, especially given that they would not be able to be re-elected. Surely a 15 year term, which is long enough to allow members to achieve something, but not so long as to encourage complacency, is better than a life term which is the current arrangement?

All three major parties have been promising Lords reform for decades. Labour were in government for 13 years and failed to deliver this, the Tories were in government for 18 years before that and also failed to reform something which gave them political advantage. Detractors say that Lib Dems are pushing Lords reform down parliament’s throat. I am proud to be a member of the party that is finally delivering a democratic second chamber where others have failed.

Over the past year Elsenham has seen what happens when Uttlesford Conservative’s fail to build enough houses across the district. It began with The Orchard development going through after an appeal was made by the developer, they were granted planning permission simply because there were not enough houses being built across Uttlesford. This triggered a search by Council Officers to find enough houses to build over the next five years, to avoid more unsuitable developments going through on appeal.

One of the areas the Council Officers identified was the Crown Estate site. The developers then contacted the Parish Council and came and gave a presentation to councillors and members of the public. They ran a public consultation last November, which residents of Elsenham were invited to. Following this, they put in an outline planning application in January for 155 new homes with a 55 bed extra care facility, this is currently being looked at by planning officers at Uttlesford, and once they receive a decision they will begin making a detailed planning application. There will also be further consultation at this stage.

Until I have seen the detailed planning application I am reserving judgement, however, I feel it is important to remember with this development that it will help us build a strong case against having any houses on the Fairfield site, something which is vitally important for Elsenham.

In March Uttlesford District Council began the process of running a district wide consultation on the Local Development Framework. Save Our Village and the Joint Parish Council Steering Group did a fantastic job of putting together model answers for residents to use in response to the consultation. During the consultation Fairfield put out a leaflet across the district asking for residents to respond in favour of a single settlement. Both the Parish Council and David and I raised our concerns with John Mitchell about this. We are hoping that in the next few weeks the official results of the consultation will be made public.

Although Fairfield have been reasonably quiet over the past year, we are in a race against time to get a new Core Strategy in place to get Option 4 off the table for good. The Core Strategy will be consulted on in June, and it is imperative that as many people as possible respond to this consultation. It is likely that Fairfield are going to put in an application for roughly 400 homes, along with an application for 3,000 in the near future.

Overall, I feel that things are moving in the right direction to get rid of Option 4, however, we still need to be as vigilant as ever.

Over the past few weeks Uttlesford Liberal Democrats have criticised the ruling Conservative’s failure to provide the glass recycling service they promised. We were told last year that glass recycling would start from April, but we have heard nothing since. I am concerned at the Conservative’s lack of communication with the residents of Uttlesford about the new recycling service they promised at the elections last May.

Although the garden waste collection has started, there have also been delays with this. However, following pressure from Liberal Democrats regarding the unfair removal of the garden waste sack service, the Conservatives have decided to continue allowing residents to use this service. However, they have failed to communicate this fact to residents.

Improved recycling was one of the Conservatives’ key manifesto pledges last year. They should come clean to Uttlesford’s residents and tell them when they will be getting their glass recycling and why the new services so far have been such a shambles.

I was disappointed by Jim Ketteridge’s comments in the local papers, where he claimed there wasn’t a delay in the Conservative’s new waste strategy. His comments directly contradicted those of Cllr Barker, the environmental portfolio holder, who owned up to the fact that there has been a delay. I find this very worrying, as it seems that the leader of the council does not communicate with his portfolio holders, and in fact is not aware of what is going on.

Cllr Barker’s comments addressed the concerns that residents have raised with me concerning the delay of doorstep glass collection, and I applaud both her and the council’s officers for trying to get the most comprehensive recycling scheme possible. However, I still feel that there has been a significant lack of communication from council leaders to Uttlesford residents.

Cllr Ketteridge’s comments though were simply obstructive. He claimed that I should know what was going on as I am a member of the waste strategy group, but it last met in January, and I have heard nothing since then. He did not address the fact that the residents of Uttlesford have been very much left in the dark over the delays, which he denies even exist while his own cabinet colleague gives a very different story.

Cllr. Ketteridge accuses me of failing to speak to UDC officers, but it is he who has failed to talk to his own cabinet!

Tweet

As I was walking through Stansted Mountfitchet Railway Station last night I was disappointed to hear an unbearable high pitched noise, known as a “mosquito device”.  Not only are these devices capable of transmitting a very high pitched noise at 108 decibels, louder than a chainsaw or pneumatic drill, but only younger people can hear them. I fundamentally disagree with them being used anywhere, but at a train station where young people have to stand and wait is totally unacceptable.

Perhaps this is something I feel particularly strong about, partly because I am a young person, but also because I have two specific learning difficulties, dyspraxia and dyscalculia. Part of this can be having over-sensitivity to light, touch, taste and noise. For me and anybody else with over-sensitivity to noise (which can also be caused by autism and Asperger’s) it is truly unbearable. I would not be able to stand on that platform and wait for 5 minutes –or longer with frequent delays (which in my experience are a common occurence on the west anglia line) – because of this mosquito device. Others who were also with me found the noise very unpleasant, even just for the couple of minutes we were there.

A spokesman from the previous rail operator said in 2007 that “We have had one or two incidents with young people hanging around at the station, not necessarily causing any real problems, but just being a distraction and some people were concerned about that” which is the justification they have given for installing this device. However, I saw no young people ‘hanging around’ anywhere in Stansted last night. I was also informed by Samantha Dunn, a Liberal Democrat candidate for Stansted South in the upcoming Parish Council election, that since the introduction of the skatepark in Stansted that is where young people now hang out.

I find it amazing that the rail network would want to alienate a core group of its customers, and I will be writing to them to explain my strong feelings on the matter. If these devices targeted any other group in society, they would be banned immediately, why is that today’s youth, who are suffering from record levels of unemployment, are so easy to unfairly target and isolate?

Tweet