Council get something right!! - Page 8

Acrylic-bob · 07-03-2005, 17:51

Let me get this straight Graham, NWDA decided that it wants to give us a panopticon and plonk it in a public park, it then submits a planning application and provided that all the access and safety issues are covered the council is required to pass it, irrespective of the wishes of the people of the borough, who's only say in this is a half arsed "tick the box" consultation exercise?

Tealeaf · 07-03-2005, 17:52

Sorry Graham...why did I call you Terry?

park381 · 07-03-2005, 18:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

Planning lawe is very strict and non flexible.[because an appeal in court can be costly to HBC]. Its about ticking boxes. Health and Safety, access, use, character. very few decisions fall in the grey area and if so, they go to the Planning Committee.

This would go the planning committee but not based on personal views, but strict planning law and regualtions criteria.

Yes I do understand planning regulations,been there and done that,what I should have said, was that if the application met all the relevant criteria, the HBC's "Officers" advise would be yes

Graham Jones · 07-03-2005, 18:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

I'm not fully following your argument, Terry. My understanding - and correct me if I'm wrong - is that the Panopticons are the brainchild of MPAA and that they would provide the initial capital funding. Further silver would come the NWDA although as to what purpose was never clearly identified.

MPA are handling the scheme but the Regional Park & NWDA are the funders and Regional Park is the long term agenda. To add to it RIBA ran the initial contest for designs. MPA are running to projects LAND and PANOPTICONS for the Regional Park [ELP]

Like most good people of Accy/Hyndburn, one look at the proposed designs is all that was needed to convince one that this was not only a colossal waste of money but a desecration of that lovely landscape, namely the coppice.

Everyones got a personal view on this and as long as it is an informed one, thats all I am bothered about.

Irrespective of Britcliffes' posterings, are you telling us that you abstained on the vote on this?

Yes. We decided not to play political games. Having the Labour Party vote yes and Conservatives no would have detracted from the debate and not added to it because of the way the controlling group works. It was a cabinet decision. Several of us that had an opnion expressed it in the press. Well a paragraph for two us actually.

Could you tell us why? Councillors are elected - irrespective of their party - to make decisions on our behalf. We are not interested in empire building or grand titles, but simple and effective decision making. If you can't do it, then I suggest you don't stand next time round.

Well if I had my way I would burn the constition so we could end political games for ever and do as you propose. However the current Conservative group have a mandate from us the people and that includes political games. Thats democracy. Vote Labour and I'll personally persue the end of silly nonesense. As for resigning. I work hard for Peel. Very hard. And when Labour lost 500 seats last summer my percentage went form 65% to 69%. People outside Peel may not know me but people here do.

Oh and I am here to take critsism, I am not always right, I expect anything I say to be thought about and challenged because thats progress.

Tealeaf · 07-03-2005, 18:04

Bollocks to the "officers"....whatever their opinions, councillors should do the job they are now handsomely paid to do, and that is to vote and overrule them in matters such as this.

WillowTheWhisp · 07-03-2005, 18:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

Like most good people of Accy/Hyndburn, one look at the proposed designs is all that was needed to convince one that this was not only a colossal waste of money but a desecration of that lovely landscape, namely the coppice.

Irrespective of Britcliffes' posterings, are you telling us that you abstained on the vote on this? Could you tell us why? Councillors are elected - irrespective of their party - to make decisions on our behalf. We are not interested in empire building or grand titles, but simple and effective decision making. If you can't do it, then I suggest you don't stand next time round.

I'm with Tealeaf on this. I don't give a hoot that the funding for the pantopticon comes from external sources. I just don't want to see any ludicrous structure on top of the Coppice. It would appear from the Observer poll that the majority of Hyndburn resident's don't want it either. For once it seemed that popular opinion was being listened to.

We need councillors who are interested in what the people of Hyndburn think. To abstain from voting for reasons not connected with the panopticon itself strikes me as somewhat irresponsible.

Graham Jones · 07-03-2005, 18:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by park381

Yes I do understand planning regulations,been there and done that,what I should have said, was that if the application met all the relevant criteria, the HBC's "Officers" advise would be yes

Funding and the consequences of funding would not be a consideration for Planning or any officers to do with planning. The officers advice would be on H&S and access, character and all other legal regulations.

Tealeaf · 07-03-2005, 18:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

Well if I had my way I would burn the constition so we could end political games for ever and do as you propose. However the current Conservative group have a mandate from us the people and that includes political games. Thats democracy. Vote Labour and I'll personally persue the end of silly nonesense. As for resigning. I work hard for Peel. Very hard. And when Labour lost 500 seats last summer my percentage went form 65% to 69%. People outside Peel may not know me but people here do.

Oh and I am here to take critsism, I am not always right, I expect anything I say to be thought about and challenged because thats progress.

Actually, Graham, its good to see a Councillor on here and making such a contribution. I wonder what your opinion is on that other colossal waste of money known as the HyndburnLife site?

Graham Jones · 07-03-2005, 18:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

I'm with Tealeaf on this. I don't give a hoot that the funding for the pantopticon comes from external sources. I just don't want to see any ludicrous structure on top of the Coppice. It would appear from the Observer poll that the majority of Hyndburn resident's don't want it either. For once it seemed that popular opinion was being listened to.

We need councillors who are interested in what the people of Hyndburn think. To abstain from voting for reasons not connected with the panopticon itself strikes me as somewhat irresponsible.

I take in board what you say. It was thought about. However Hyndburn if you hadn't noticed is going down the pan - £27m in debt now - and the issue isn't the Panopticons, and making a political show out of the Panopticons is not the answer to our problems. As I said. Britcliffe knew he'd suck a lot of people in with this issue rather than the budget. It is important to stay focused on priorities. Its hard but you have to be realistic.

g78 · 07-03-2005, 18:13

Classic diversionary tactics...... The day Britcliffe goes is the day that Hyndburn will start to improve.

park381 · 07-03-2005, 18:13

Quote:

Oh and I am here to take critsism, I am not always right, I expect anything I say to be thought about and challenged because thats progress

That's a fair comment graham.
Just picked this one up from tonights Lancs evening telegraph
http://www.thisislancashire.co.uk/la.../NEWSACC0.html
This area was totally trashed during the market development, I know it needs re-vamping but why was it not made part of that market development, it was enabling work in the first place to allow for the new build, so as part of that contract it should have been made good on completion, total bad management on HBC's part.

Tealeaf · 07-03-2005, 18:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

I take in board what you say. It was thought about. However Hyndburn if you hadn't noticed is going down the pan - £27m in debt now - and the issue isn't the Panopticons, and making a political show out of the Panopticons is not the answer to our problems. As I said. Britcliffe knew he'd suck a lot of people in with this issue rather than the budget. It is important to stay focused on priorities. Its hard but you have to be realistic.

Hold on a minute...was this the meeting that was deferred because of the Walkers/Dingles kick about last tuesday? May I ask if you voted to defer this meeting and if so what your vote was?

Graham Jones · 07-03-2005, 18:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

Actually, Graham, its good to see a Councillor on here and making such a contribution. I wonder what your opinion is on that other colossal waste of money known as the HyndburnLife site?

I'll take any critsism as long as its constructive. A lot of people think councillor, freeloader, likes his own voice etc... I work in factory and live on a poorish street in a poorish [and declining] neighbourhood and pay taxes as anyone else. How will the Panopticon alter the problems around here?? It won't naerly as much as budget decisions - like wardens. The budget is the priority not Panopticons.

Graham Jones · 07-03-2005, 18:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

Hold on a minute...was this the meeting that was deferred because of the Walkers/Dingles kick about last tuesday? May I ask if you voted to defer this meeting and if so what your vote was?

Britcliffe asked me because he knows I am season ticket holder and wanted to 'spead the blame' AGAIN!!! I believe in consensus and the views of the other 15 Labour Councillors. They were for keeping the meeting as scheduled. It had been resheduled once by a fortnight originally to suit PB.

My view. My neighbourhood elected me and I accepted by putting my name forward. Dont like the heat get out of the kitchen. However my son would have really gutted to not have gone.

Tealeaf · 07-03-2005, 18:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

I'll take any critsism as long as its constructive. A lot of people think councillor, freeloader, likes his own voice etc... I work in factory and live on a poorish street in a poorish [and declining] neighbourhood and pay taxes as anyone else. How will the Panopticon alter the problems around here?? It won't naerly as much as budget decisions - like wardens. The budget is the priority not Panopticons.

It's simple. The Panoticons,if given the go-ahead, involve current maintainance expenditure in future years; no-one wants them, so why make make matters more difficult?. A simple and resounding "no" to the Panoticon is all that would have been needed and then down to the nitty-gritty of the 2005/6 budget.