Does Anybody Care About The Community Wardens?

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by Neil

Are you sure that the Wardens only work in those 4 wards?

Devolution has already started in Hyndburn, I saw you at one of the Friends of Rhyddings Park meetings. I think you forgot to sign in.

The wardens original funding was for the 4 wards only. Subsequently they have been asked to attend all area councils and have a walk around. This change in duties confused a lot of residents in places like Rishton into believing they now had a warden service. The Council did little to explain their limited activities in those areas.

Serious devolution can't happen for the warden service now they have been given redundancy notices. If the scheme is revived by one of the political parties, then expect some devolvement of duties to residents. I think it would be quite something for Ossy, or Harwood or Clayton to have their own dedicated warden service.

Secondly the Green Spaces forum received some funding for evenings for HBC open spaces to be patrolled and the wardens were employed to patrol those across the borough. I have seen them a few times up Plantation Rd. So techncially they can be seen outside the 4 wards, though in essence they don't work outside the 4 wards in their normal capacity.

FoRP. What a shambolic meeting. No-one came out with much credit [except Gayle!]. The residents that were there were either Peter's friends or Peters enemies [ie Labour voters]. The rules were being made up on the fly, PB changed his title to stay as chair [to chief facilitator NOT chair person] and a farcical postal vote was set up to obtain political control for Peter and his supporters. No other group in my experience has either been as chaotic, convoluted or as political as that. And the subsequent vote I have a suspicion was contrived to keep Gayle out at all costs.

It would be interesting to hear your comments but it was also ILLUMINATING to know that you were there Neil!! I always had you down as a close friend of Peter's

[Neil]

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

It would be interesting to hear your comments

I apologize now as I think this might get long and is rather off topic.

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

FoRP. What a shambolic meeting.

I agree with you it was shambolic. I personally believe that the mass Labour turnout was a mistake

on your part. I think that all you managed to do was make people suspicious, myself included, as to

the ulterior motive for your presence. After all why would 3 or 4 Labour Councillors from outside

Oswaldtwistle want to attend the meeting as claimed observers? The behavour of certain members of

the Labour party only served to annoy people, in fact several residents mentioned that to me at the

time and since the meeting.

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

No-one came out with much credit [except Gayle!].

I have a few reasons to disagree with that but I do not wish to discuss Gayle on here except to say

that I personally have a lot of time for her and think she would have made an excellent committee

member. We discussed Rhyddings Park both in PM's and in person. Some of which was in confidence so

no I won't say what about.

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

The residents that were there were either Peter's friends or Peters enemies [ie

Labour voters].

The whole idea of the group is to be non political, that is why Coucillors are excluded from being

allowed on the committee. You heard the comments of some residents on this subject when the

Constitution was discussed. After all what would be the point of the Council devolving the park to

other Councillors?

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

PB changed his title to stay as chair [to chief facilitator NOT chair

person]

Whatever name you want to use someone had to keep the meeting on track. He said himself that the

group should not be political and was opposed to Councillors being involved at Committee level

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

a farcical postal vote was set up to obtain political control for Peter and his

supporters.

I have already stated on this forum that I am not a supporter of Peter.

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

it was also ILLUMINATING to know that you were there Neil!!

Why Illuminating?

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

I always had you down as a close friend of Peter's

Have you actually read any of my posts on AccyWeb? If you had you might withdraw that statement

If you want to discuss the subject further I will buy you a pint in The Stag on Saturday night so I

don't get slapped for thread wondering.

[Alec_Ish]

Special powers! ill stick up 4 you.
The Com. wardens are good as i was a junior com. warden and they are really nice and friendly and have helped my neighbourood recently.

P.s Carm down less lol

Alec
(Jimmi5bellies Son)

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by Neil

I apologize now as I think this might get long and is rather off topic.


I agree with you it was shambolic. I personally believe that the mass Labour turnout was a mistake

on your part. I think that all you managed to do was make people suspicious, myself included, as to

the ulterior motive for your presence. After all why would 3 or 4 Labour Councillors from outside

Oswaldtwistle want to attend the meeting as claimed observers? The behavour of certain members of

the Labour party only served to annoy people, in fact several residents mentioned that to me at the

time and since the meeting.



I have a few reasons to disagree with that but I do not wish to discuss Gayle on here except to say

that I personally have a lot of time for her and think she would have made an excellent committee

member. We discussed Rhyddings Park both in PM's and in person. Some of which was in confidence so

no I won't say what about.



The whole idea of the group is to be non political, that is why Coucillors are excluded from being

allowed on the committee. You heard the comments of some residents on this subject when the

Constitution was discussed. After all what would be the point of the Council devolving the park to

other Councillors?


Whatever name you want to use someone had to keep the meeting on track. He said himself that the

group should not be political and was opposed to Councillors being involved at Committee level


I have already stated on this forum that I am not a supporter of Peter.


Why Illuminating?


Have you actually read any of my posts on AccyWeb? If you had you might withdraw that statement

If you want to discuss the subject further I will buy you a pint in The Stag on Saturday night so I

don't get slapped for thread wondering.

I'll wander once as well!

Your understanding of that meeting and all around it is not mine. I would like to challange your assumptions.

Friends of Oakhill Park last week, organised like FoRP by the Council has no exclusion of Councillors and residents are happy.

No-one wants me to step down as chair of Arden Hall as yet. Having a chair as a councillor is a big asset, and thats with 2 years of experience. We have Tories on our committee I am sure, so IMHO I think people make problems where there aren't any. Resident chairs have a big learning curve in front of them [in terms of the complexities/networking of councils, NGO's] but if they work hard they can suceed.

This meeting was trumpeted as pilot for a new council policy so it would have been a dereliction not to be there.The problems were nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with Peter Britcliffe's style of leadership.

Someone wrote the following week in the paper they would never vote Labour again which was ironic because 3 Conservative voters outside told me this will be the first time they will not vote Conservative at the local election [they're voting Labour] because of the way that meeting was organised. Obviously not everyone thought PB handed it well at all.

Peter's track record is overtly polictical and I just hope you are not tinged and manage to make it a success. We will meet anyway at the Green Spaces Forum now you are chair of a Friends. Should be interesting with your cross political views