Residents want canal back in town centre masterplan (From Swindon Advertiser)
Get involved! Send photos, video, news & views. Text SWINDON NEWS to 80360 or email us
Residents want canal back in town centre masterplan
8:00pm Friday 15th February 2013 in News By Scott D'Arcy
Launch of Swindon town centre masterplan exhibition at Swindon central library last year. From left, Swindon Council leader Rod Bluh, Ian Piper (CEO of Forward Swindon ) and Councillor Garry Perkins
THE GRAND plan for an overhaul of Swindon town centre could be set to get its own makeover – after consulted residents said they wanted the idea of a canal reinstated.
The majority of about 100 respondents to Forward Swindon’s Masterplan consultation claimed they wanted to see the canal running through the pedestrianised town centre area, while much of the rest of the plan remains unchanged.
The firm have been charged by Swindon Council with regenerating the town, and unveiled its view of the shape of things to come in around 10 to 15 years time, back in September at the Central Library, for public scrutiny.
It enlisted the help of town planners Allies and Morrison Urban Practitioners, the architects behind the much-lauded Olympic Park, in Stratford, London, and the proposals include a new performing arts centre, art gallery and a two-way Commercial Road.
The masterplan includes bringing the canal back into the town through North Star as far as a basin adjacent to Station Road but the Wilts and Berks Canal Trust said, crucially, it omits linking this section to the restored canal at Westleaze.
Forward Swindon’s chief executive Ian Piper said all responses from the public had now been analysed and a revised draft was going to be put before the cross-party group of councillors before it goes to full council, potentially in April.
He said: “What is happening at the moment is we have reviewed the consultation responses, which took a little bit longer that we anticipated, and are putting them together to show councillors.
“There was quite a lot of detail in some of the responses, including one that went through the proposal almost line by line, and so we wanted to make sure we considered all of them.
“The level of responses for a consultation of this type was good and the majority of it was positive.
“We had about 80 respondents to the questionnaire and another 15 to 20 letters from organisations.
“We have pencilled in for full council in April and will show councillors the changed draft plan.
“We will also put it to them about what they would like to do about the canal.
“We had a lot of comments on the canal, many supporting it being reinstated on the plans. We will need to talk to members about that as it was not shown on the draft plan.”
Comments(59)
Empty Car Park
says...
9:12pm Fri 15 Feb 13
“There was quite a lot of detail in some of the responses, including one that went through the proposal almost line by line, and so we wanted to make sure we considered all of them.
Which councillor was that then?
...the Wilts and Berks Canal Trust said, crucially, it omits linking this section to the restored canal at Westleaze.
So just another wasteful project then
Lets see how Oliver defends his wife's fellow cabinet members over this one
anotherimigrant
says...
9:17pm Fri 15 Feb 13
How can anyone consent to an open sewer running through the town.
NOONE at this corupt council will be resonsible for anything not even the 45k spent and lost on this folly so far.
Waste of time, money and effort.
anotherimigrant
says...
9:22pm Fri 15 Feb 13
NO THEY DONT. LETS HAVE A VOTE ON IT, BY THOSE WHO LIVE NEAR WHERE THIS CORRUPT COUNCIL AND IT,S CHUMS THINK THEY WILL IMPOSE THIS OPEN SEWER
MrAngry
says...
9:22pm Fri 15 Feb 13
Anyone opposed to the canal would have been happy with the original plans and would have no need to respond.
dukeofM4
says...
9:42pm Fri 15 Feb 13
However it's not really viable. Unlike in Germany where these type of things get respected, in Swindon it would just turn into a place for drunks to urinate in, and others to throw litter. We're unable to stop the chewing gum problem throughout the centre.
Would a canal with floating pieces of paper, torn up bookie slips, empty cans, and dog ends, with the slight aroma of urine really add to Swindon?
RICHARDPIKE
says...
9:42pm Fri 15 Feb 13
faatmaan
says...
10:00pm Fri 15 Feb 13
umpcah
says...
10:25pm Fri 15 Feb 13
darrey80
says...
10:46pm Fri 15 Feb 13
anotherimigrant wrote:You fail to see the irony of your post - you complain that the statement is speaking for you but you are speaking for everyone saying 'NO WE DON'T.
Residents want canal back in town centre masterplan.
NO THEY DONT. LETS HAVE A VOTE ON IT, BY THOSE WHO LIVE NEAR WHERE THIS CORRUPT COUNCIL AND IT,S CHUMS THINK THEY WILL IMPOSE THIS OPEN SEWER
You don't I do.
darrey80
says...
10:51pm Fri 15 Feb 13
LordAshOfTheBrake
says...
10:58pm Fri 15 Feb 13
There are far better things the money could be spent on.
Phantom Poster
says...
12:21am Sat 16 Feb 13
dukeofM4 wrote:Why do you have such disrespect for the people of Swindon? There is a canal through Reading centre and I don't see those problems there.
Personally I love the idea.
However it's not really viable. Unlike in Germany where these type of things get respected, in Swindon it would just turn into a place for drunks to urinate in, and others to throw litter. We're unable to stop the chewing gum problem throughout the centre.
Would a canal with floating pieces of paper, torn up bookie slips, empty cans, and dog ends, with the slight aroma of urine really add to Swindon?
I don't even think that the proposed canal is necessarily a good idea, but the people of Reading are no better than those in Swindon and it's pretty depressing how posters on here seem to do nothing else than complain about Swindon and its people!
If it's so, so bad then don't live here! In the end it says something about you, doesn't it? By the way, I'm not a Swindonian.
Empty Car Park
says...
8:42am Sat 16 Feb 13
Can you not see how that is "such disrespect for the people of Swindon"?
The method of consultation, from a no doubt hand picked 100, people is even more disrespectful
SockPuppet
says...
8:52am Sat 16 Feb 13
Currently it is an idea being kicked about and needs more substance.
On a side note does Gary Perkins creep anyone else out?
house on the hill
says...
8:59am Sat 16 Feb 13
Always Grumpy
says...
8:59am Sat 16 Feb 13
Failing that, with the constant wind blowing through the Brunel Centre it would be great for yacht racing and certainly bring the crowds back into Swindon town centre.
Meldrews Dad
says...
9:33am Sat 16 Feb 13
Great to know that Swindon recognize their technique of asking a small group of friends what they think skews the result of a "consulation".
What about an annual referendum of thorny issues at the same time as the may elections? Nice idea but it wont happen as the senior council officers would hate any genuine input by the public.
Yes we need vibrancy of street traders in the town and the arguments used against them are snobbish and weak.
Councillors should abandon all attempts to take the town "upmarket" and concentrate on making the place a good place to shop.
The town is dieing rapidly with shops closing in all streets. Popularity of the town is waning as was shown this morning when I drove in to the central library and had a choice of street parking slots.”
anotherimigrant
says...
9:48am Sat 16 Feb 13
Thats about right for Swindon.
Now what about some comments on how your going to get across the bottom of Kingshill?
How do you propose getting the cars out were the canal was filled in and the little humpback bridge was removed??
I,m interested because I use that piece of road regularly and dont fancy another single lane traffic light controlled cockup that this council has made us the laughing stock of the country for.
Comments quickly please as this thred will no doubt be quickly closed due to the Adver changing stories quickly so we dont get boged down iiin meaningfull debate which no one reads and the council dont give a toss about
darrey80
says...
11:03am Sat 16 Feb 13
Empty Car Park wrote:How on earth is it hand picked? Every Swindon resident could have responded to the draft masterplan. The vast majority of comments backed the scheme - not all but the majority was very positive.
So we pay for a (poorly designed,non functioning) canal because Reading has (an established functioning) one
Can you not see how that is "such disrespect for the people of Swindon"?
The method of consultation, from a no doubt hand picked 100, people is even more disrespectful
Why assume its poorly designed - the route is not even yet agreed let alone designed!
malctg
says...
2:21pm Sat 16 Feb 13
David Renard
says...
2:29pm Sat 16 Feb 13
anotherimigrant wrote:More unsubstantiated allegations of corruption. Put up or shut up.
Everything you say is TRUE, but you wont get any answers. Not from this council.
How can anyone consent to an open sewer running through the town.
NOONE at this corupt council will be resonsible for anything not even the 45k spent and lost on this folly so far.
Waste of time, money and effort.
candid friend
says...
2:32pm Sat 16 Feb 13
The cost would be colossal just to get access to the Town Centre.
The consultation? has obviously been high-jacked by the Canal Lobby.
The Tories are on the way out and are trying to create problems for their successors.
It's called a "scorched earth policy" in warfare.
umpcah
says...
2:34pm Sat 16 Feb 13
whaddahey?!
says...
2:56pm Sat 16 Feb 13
Set that against the cabinet's obvious support for the project.
Set that against this article receiving the full press-release treatment after drawing its false conclusion that 'the people' support the inclusion of the canal.
Set it against the Canal Trust having their property opposite the library (for free? Given to them by the council? And what are they promoting there, eh?)
This is yet another example of our local policiticans ignoring democrasy and assuming that they can dupe the populace into believing that there's widespread support for what is essentially the obsession of just a handful of people. Our opinions, as usual count for nothing in the face of those who believe that they know best. Claiming that the view of a minority of a mere 100 people represents the views of most people in this town is utterly and obviously absurd.
Funny isn't it that when a handful of people apparently support something the council wants to do, they think its significant - but when many hundreds sign petitions against things the council wants to do, they're dismissed as un-representative?
They're utter hypocrites.
Tim Newroman
says...
3:03pm Sat 16 Feb 13
darrey80 wrote:Careful, Empty Car Park / I Could Do That will start calling you 'Olive' soon.
Empty Car Park wrote:How on earth is it hand picked? Every Swindon resident could have responded to the draft masterplan. The vast majority of comments backed the scheme - not all but the majority was very positive.
So we pay for a (poorly designed,non functioning) canal because Reading has (an established functioning) one
Can you not see how that is "such disrespect for the people of Swindon"?
The method of consultation, from a no doubt hand picked 100, people is even more disrespectful
Why assume its poorly designed - the route is not even yet agreed let alone designed!
He thinks everyone, and it is most people, who disagrees with him and points out his errors must be called 'Bob', or 'Olive'.
No one really knows why he constantly and automatically makes up lies to denigrate the council, but I fear it may have something to do with an attempt to ingratiate himself with people who don't even appear to like him over at his favourite local forum website.
dukeofM4
says...
3:07pm Sat 16 Feb 13
Phantom Poster wrote:Join the club I'm not a Swindonian as well. I'm only being honest and ultimately it's the responsibility of the Swindonians themselves what kind of town they want to live in.
dukeofM4 wrote:Why do you have such disrespect for the people of Swindon? There is a canal through Reading centre and I don't see those problems there.
Personally I love the idea.
However it's not really viable. Unlike in Germany where these type of things get respected, in Swindon it would just turn into a place for drunks to urinate in, and others to throw litter. We're unable to stop the chewing gum problem throughout the centre.
Would a canal with floating pieces of paper, torn up bookie slips, empty cans, and dog ends, with the slight aroma of urine really add to Swindon?
I don't even think that the proposed canal is necessarily a good idea, but the people of Reading are no better than those in Swindon and it's pretty depressing how posters on here seem to do nothing else than complain about Swindon and its people!
If it's so, so bad then don't live here! In the end it says something about you, doesn't it? By the way, I'm not a Swindonian.
Perhaps the Council should take into consideration the views of people who have gotten around a bit. It's probably true most non-Swindonians wish the best for the town, however, this town regeneration potentially could be another lost opportunity. Swindon has been there before when they 'regenerated' the town centre in the 1970s.
Towns that spring to mind are Basingstoke and Bristol that now have nicer town centres.
But we live in 2013 and 1990s urban planning won't work. The town centre needs to turn into an attractive place to work, live, and play and not the current situation where it's a ghost town by 18.00 with only pubs selling pushing their 'drink of the month' promotions.
If Swindon was in mainland Europe, it would probably have much better transport links (a tram system) connecting the town together than our overpriced bus service that is cutting back service because subsidiaries are being cut with disrespectful fellow passengers putting their muddy shoes on the seats. Swindon is a town of 200,000 with all the outlaying areas included - and we won't even discuss the bargain £7750 annual pass to London. If we had high speed rail Paddington could only be 30 mins away! Swindon is definitely restrained by Central Gov't policies.
Being on the GWR, and the M4 is not enough along with a few big name companies like Honda. The decision for the Univ of Bath to pull out for me was a real lost. Swindon needs to become some sort of centre for IT, Education or Medical services to keep money in the town than always getting into a panic when Honda makes redundant 800 staff. I guess I mean diversification is the way to go. Someone has to get the ball rolling but it's difficult in the early years.
Tim Newroman
says...
3:20pm Sat 16 Feb 13
With regards to the canal, experience tends to suggest the council would make a pig's ear of it, but, in essence, I quite like the idea of creating something in the town centre that makes it different to what it is now. It's healthy to float these ideas, regardless of whether they end up a reality or not.
Davey Gravey
says...
3:29pm Sat 16 Feb 13
Oliver_Donachie
says...
5:14pm Sat 16 Feb 13
The Conservative party has done exactly the opposite of destroying public service. I do not expect you to take my word for this so would refer you to the entirely independent audit commission:
http://swindonlabour
check.com/index.php/
labour/
It is a fact that during the last time Labour ran the council it was not mathematically possible for it to be rated any worse:
http://swindonlabour
check.com/index.php/
42-2/
Since then it has been independently audited to rate as either "good" or "excellent" depending on the department.
By all means dislike a party for what it represents but flying in the face of a public audit smacks of a desperate argument.
whaddahey?!
says...
5:19pm Sat 16 Feb 13
Why does this council, and specifically the cabinet, ignore the views of far larger petitions voicing opposition to council endorsed plans and yet a percentage of just 100 people is held here to be significant enough to see the redrafting of the town centre plan?
female resident
says...
6:00pm Sat 16 Feb 13
darrey80
says...
6:02pm Sat 16 Feb 13
umpcah wrote:For the last time - no one was chosen. Every Swindon resident could have replied to the draft masterplan so those writing here in compliant why not respond to the consultation originally?
Were any of the chosen 100 told that their council taxes would leap to pay for this ridiculous project ? No doubt an expensive feasibility study will ensue when even someone with the i/q of a mentally handicapped hamster could work out that this project is a non-starter.
And how exactly are you qualified to comment? A town planner or civil engineer are you?
whaddahey?!
says...
6:38pm Sat 16 Feb 13
The farcical claims in this article are a classic example of why nobody bothers. Politicians are to blame for this apathy - NOT residents.
As for someone being qualified to offer an opinion on this project - if you're so arrogant as to dismiss anyones objections out of hand, why bother with a consultation in the first place? It appears we mere proles don't know whats good for us - and only planners or politicans have the answers, eh? Well, I have an example of why thats obviously not true - Swindon. Take a long hard look at the place. Planners and politicians made it into the mess we see around us.
There are lots of questions which need to be answered if this project is to retain even a shred of credibility:
Was Rod Bluh previously involved as a high ranking member of the Canal Trust?
Have the Canal Trust received free accomodation in the shop accross from the Library for the last three years, or not? If so, I think voters are entitled to conclude that it means its presence was provided at tax payers expense and is in itself an implied endorsement by the council.
(Canal shop opposite the library - interestingly enough to a cynic, where the 'consultation' was housed. Possible link there to the unexpected refreshed 'residents' interest in the canal...?!)
Is less than 100 people a significant cross section of a population of nearly a quarter of a million - and is their *apparent* endorsement of a canal grounds in itself to include a canal in a redrafted town centre plan with all the associated cost to tax payers that will involve?
EVERETTP9
says...
7:13pm Sat 16 Feb 13
Oliver_Donachie
says...
7:23pm Sat 16 Feb 13
whaddahey?! wrote:Whaddahey,
Mr Donachie, what about addressing the subject of this thread?
Why does this council, and specifically the cabinet, ignore the views of far larger petitions voicing opposition to council endorsed plans and yet a percentage of just 100 people is held here to be significant enough to see the redrafting of the town centre plan?
I agree with you, 100 people is not enough of a data set to make a conclusive conclusion, however in the defense of the process:
1: They put out a consultation.
2: Anyone was free to respond but "only" 100 did.
3: Of those 100 the majority seem to be in favor.
So within the framework of the consultation it appears to conclude that people are in favor. This leaves the real question on the table, "how can the council engage with people to get more meaningful data around these kinds of studies".
As an aside, I personally would welcome the regeneration of the canal as it helps frame our history as a logistical centre via train, land and barge and is a welcome link to the past. Not at any costs however.
whaddahey?!
says...
7:38pm Sat 16 Feb 13
Can I also correct you on something? This is not a 'regeneration' of the canal. That would suggest that there was something to regenerate, whereas there's NOTHING left of the old canal in town. Given that a huge chunk of the proposed canal will be dug through a new route, it would be much better described a s 'reinvention'. Its fair to say its almost entirely new and has no historical precedent. Neither (unlike the old canal) will it actually link to anywhere. As planned, its essentially cul-de-sac of stagnant water.
Given the massive disruption digging a new canal will cause to existing roads and services, and the lack of purpose or realistic draw for tourists, what viable purpose does it serve?
Davey Gravey
says...
7:42pm Sat 16 Feb 13
Oliver_Donachie
says...
7:53pm Sat 16 Feb 13
The point you make about regeneration is noted and its clear you have a deeper understanding of the plan than I do, and I agree if its a land locked system then it does not have the same degree of attraction for me.
That said...I find water aesthetically pleasing, I think it work very well in Bristol and other areas. I also find that Swindon does downplay its history in terms of logistics and its deep roots with water transport, specifically its influence on the siting of the Great Western Railway's Works.
Again, my desire to try and capture and preserve the history of the Brunel spirit is pragmatic, I would welcome an operational canal especially as a joined up "theme" that links to wider town centre regeneration but stress not at any costs.
Empty Car Park
says...
8:07pm Sat 16 Feb 13
I still feel that the main objective of your sudden surge of input is that your wife is a conservative cabinet member on the council.
This is poorly thought out idea
This will ultimately be very expensive
This will ultimately be disruptive to traffic and businesses
The (re invented) deadend canal will be meaningless, a liability, and something else for Swindon to be laughed at
Oliver_Donachie
says...
8:14pm Sat 16 Feb 13
I am not entirely sure what my partner having being anything to do with politics has on a discussion about waterways within Swindon, but as you seem so energetic I am happy to point out how silly you are, a few facts:
1: In my house my entire family was raised to think independently of each other meaning we are more than welcome to talk about anything we wish in any manner we wish, I appreciate this may be different in your home and differ from how you were raised.
2: I do not have a wife. I am not married.
3: My partner is not on the Council.
Can the grown ups continue to talk about canals now?
Peter Mallinson
says...
8:25pm Sat 16 Feb 13
It is clean and well used by both barge traffic and locals (fishing).
There are many cafes, pubs etc along the banks and during the summer months it is like a magnet to the local people.
Why is it that whenever something is suggested in Swindon some people immediately react negatively.
Is that why we have never had good historical buildings in this town.
A quick look at almost any town in the North would show what this attitude has left us with.
A few rows of red brick houses.
Jeremy Hilary Boob
says...
8:27pm Sat 16 Feb 13
There's no money for this sort of nonsense and there won't be for at least 10-15 years. Are we going to put any redevelopment on hold until the country can afford such luxuries as a pointless canal coming into Swindon town centre and stopping there?
I responded to this "masterplan" with a detailed reponse that was against the canal (and a lot of the other ideas). Nice to see that view has been ignored and a single interest group which has constantly used the Adver to promote itself gets its view taken onboard. And SBC wonder why
dukeofM4
says...
8:52pm Sat 16 Feb 13
We need to focus on re-balancing the local economy towards wealth creating future industries along with improved local transport links. The rest doesn't matter.
If the SBC wants to be bold, why not do a white paper on a tram system that would give Swindon more character than a dead end canal.
Empty Car Park
says...
10:07pm Sat 16 Feb 13
Oliver_Donachie wrote:Oliver_Donachie says...
"Empty"
I am not entirely sure what my partner having being anything to do with politics has on a discussion about waterways within Swindon, but as you seem so energetic I am happy to point out how silly you are, a few facts:
1: In my house my entire family was raised to think independently of each other meaning we are more than welcome to talk about anything we wish in any manner we wish, I appreciate this may be different in your home and differ from how you were raised.
2: I do not have a wife. I am not married.
3: My partner is not on the Council.
Can the grown ups continue to talk about canals now?
8:14pm Sat 16 Feb 13
3: My partner is not on the Council.
Can the grown ups continue to talk about canals now?
Oliver_Donachie says...
8:48pm Sat 16 Feb 13
My partner is a Councillor
And a board member of Swindon Strategic Economic Partnership
As a grown up, I feel that issues should be discussed honestly.
As many other grown ups have expressed discontent with the consultation process of many issues, including this canal pRodject, it is important that anyone with a biased opinion is transparent
whaddahey?!
says...
10:14pm Sat 16 Feb 13
It means your analogy of a canal being used by tourist to pass through a town on their way from one place to another is spurious. Or do you think holiday makers are going to motor up this dead-ended stretch to enjoy the concrete and vomit strewn vistas of Fleet Street?
And its also disengenuous to try to portray serious and intelligent questions about its viablity, relevence or sustainability as an 'automatic negativity'. Sensible successful ideas are ones which have been scrutinised and thought through. This concept on the otherhand, smacks of the usual desperation of the current council to grab at any project and see it as salvation. I wish you and your collegues would use a little imagination and really engage with the people you're supposed to represent.
Please address the questions with some convincing answers, and maybe you'll supress the negativity, eh?
timt1964
says...
10:45pm Sat 16 Feb 13
Empty Car Park
says...
8:24am Sun 17 Feb 13
I wish you and your collegues would use a little imagination and really engage with the people you're supposed to represent.
I don't think Peter is a councillor anymore.
There are however, a number of councillors (and their spouses) that post on here without declaring their "interest"
Previously a "David Renard" told somebody to "put up or shut up"
Was that Councillor David Renard?
Jeremy Hilary Boob
says...
8:40am Sun 17 Feb 13
Peter Mallinson wrote:Do you honestly think that cafes and pubs will spring up alongside a narrow canal that comes into Swindon town centre and then does nothing? People are only going to open those if others are going to visit it and no-one's going to bother with a stretch of water that serves no purpose and offers nothing of interest
I come from a town in the North of England where there is a canal running through it.
It is clean and well used by both barge traffic and locals (fishing).
There are many cafes, pubs etc along the banks and during the summer months it is like a magnet to the local people.
Why is it that whenever something is suggested in Swindon some people immediately react negatively.
Is that why we have never had good historical buildings in this town.
A quick look at almost any town in the North would show what this attitude has left us with.
A few rows of red brick houses.
People don't immediately react negatively when something like this is suggested. Those against it have looked at the constant pro-canal PR in the Adver and concluded that doesn't seem to offer m/any of the benefits claimed, threatens years of disruption and would just be £50m+ of expense even if the council could manage the project properly. Ultimately, what is the point of this coming into the town centre? Pleasure trips from Westcott Place to Fleet Street? Other places must be bricking themselves as the thought of Swindon offering such a major attraction.
As for comment tieing in anti-canal posters with anti-anything, it's not true. I responded to the "masterplan" and was against the canal because I just don't see the point. However, I was in favour of restoring the Mechanics - a far better use of £50m - (although not in the way the Mechanics Trust want it restored). Does this still make me immediately negative?
The problem with this whole plan is that the council and "Forward" Swindon tell each other what they want to hear. No one comes in from outside and tells them the town is falling behind other towns, and that it's never going to be the tourist mecca that the council think it is/can be.
This just smacks of SBC desperately trying to show that something is being done here. Even they must realise that constantly trumpeting a 5-year-old library extension as the best thing ever can't go on forever, so they've latched on to this. It also gives them a handy get-out for nothing happening in the town centre: "We were waiting for the canal before we started on anything else, and the canal never happened."
MrAngry
says...
11:47am Sun 17 Feb 13
darrey80 wrote:Every Swindon resident COULD have commented on the content of the plan. Those who want a canal would understandly comment on its omission, but those against don't need to. Had the draft plan included a canal, the council would probably have had 100 responses against it.
umpcah wrote:For the last time - no one was chosen. Every Swindon resident could have replied to the draft masterplan so those writing here in compliant why not respond to the consultation originally?
Were any of the chosen 100 told that their council taxes would leap to pay for this ridiculous project ? No doubt an expensive feasibility study will ensue when even someone with the i/q of a mentally handicapped hamster could work out that this project is a non-starter.
And how exactly are you qualified to comment? A town planner or civil engineer are you?
You could argue that the 199,900 who didn't respond were happy with the plan as it is.
Jeremy Hilary Boob
says...
12:17pm Sun 17 Feb 13
As for the pathetic number of replies to the original perhaps people have just got to the stage where they think SBC will do what they want to do anyway so there's little or no point in bothering to comment? You only have to look at SBC's arrogance over things like Croft or the lack of acknowlegement that Bluh and Perkins wasted £450k of our money on a needless wi-fi scheme - and didn't even have the decency to resign over it, to see where people's cynicism and apathy comes from.
Tim Newroman
says...
9:29am Mon 18 Feb 13
They don't, and you can look at May's local election results for evidence of that. Not even the half a million quid wasted on Wi-Fi made a dent in the voting patterns.
I also believe that the Lefties actually play into the hands of the current council. It's blindingly obvious that the usual suspects will oppose any and all council suggestions, so they may as well be ignored. The likes of I Could Do That will forever moan on about Wi-Fi yet never state what they'd like money spent on, other than meaninglessly vague statements about 'heritage'.
Jeremy Hilary Boob is right when it comes to why people are cynical and apathetic. Most people simply do not care, they have more important and, frankly, better things to do than get wound up about the council every waking minute of their days.
Empty Car Park
says...
9:58am Mon 18 Feb 13
Usually for no other reason than political bias or family connections
RMepstead
says...
10:36am Mon 18 Feb 13
Tim Newroman
says...
11:33am Mon 18 Feb 13
Empty Car Park wrote:Entirely incorrect, as per usual. Your blind - and quite bizarre - hatred always clouds your mind.
....whilst others will thoughtlessly attempt (yet fail) to defend every stupid motion the council springs on us.
Usually for no other reason than political bias or family connections
I have no allegiance to the council, or any councillors. That you think I have reveals how badly your thinking has been corrupted. If I cared, I'd find it quite sad.
There are plenty of council decisions I do not support and openly oppose. As I have no politial bias and no family connection, blood or relationship wise, you are, as ever, widely off the mark.
What does intrigue me is why you have such a fixation on Oliver Donachie - a person who, I would imagine, has never done anything to you personally. I mean, we know BobFM managed to get you sacked, so I can see why you'd allow yourself to get eaten up about that for the rest of your life, but what has your beloved 'Olive' ever done to you?
Empty Car Park
says...
12:51pm Mon 18 Feb 13
How would that even be possible?
Empty Car Park
says...
12:54pm Mon 18 Feb 13
Tim Newroman wrote:Where did I mention your name?
Empty Car Park wrote:Entirely incorrect, as per usual. Your blind - and quite bizarre - hatred always clouds your mind.
....whilst others will thoughtlessly attempt (yet fail) to defend every stupid motion the council springs on us.
Usually for no other reason than political bias or family connections
I have no allegiance to the council, or any councillors. That you think I have reveals how badly your thinking has been corrupted. If I cared, I'd find it quite sad.
There are plenty of council decisions I do not support and openly oppose. As I have no politial bias and no family connection, blood or relationship wise, you are, as ever, widely off the mark.
What does intrigue me is why you have such a fixation on Oliver Donachie - a person who, I would imagine, has never done anything to you personally. I mean, we know BobFM managed to get you sacked, so I can see why you'd allow yourself to get eaten up about that for the rest of your life, but what has your beloved 'Olive' ever done to you?
Tim Newroman
says...
8:58am Tue 19 Feb 13
Empty Car Park wrote:Why do you have such a pathological hatred of him then? A retired barman from a small local pub... do he really control your life to the extent it appears he does?
Robfm did not get me sacked.
How would that even be possible?
Tim Newroman
says...
8:59am Tue 19 Feb 13
Empty Car Park wrote:You didn't, but you frequently and repeatedly refer to me as 'Olive', as you well know.
Tim Newroman wrote:Where did I mention your name?
Empty Car Park wrote:Entirely incorrect, as per usual. Your blind - and quite bizarre - hatred always clouds your mind.
....whilst others will thoughtlessly attempt (yet fail) to defend every stupid motion the council springs on us.
Usually for no other reason than political bias or family connections
I have no allegiance to the council, or any councillors. That you think I have reveals how badly your thinking has been corrupted. If I cared, I'd find it quite sad.
There are plenty of council decisions I do not support and openly oppose. As I have no politial bias and no family connection, blood or relationship wise, you are, as ever, widely off the mark.
What does intrigue me is why you have such a fixation on Oliver Donachie - a person who, I would imagine, has never done anything to you personally. I mean, we know BobFM managed to get you sacked, so I can see why you'd allow yourself to get eaten up about that for the rest of your life, but what has your beloved 'Olive' ever done to you?
It's hardly my fault that you always get things wrong.
whaddahey?! says...
8:47pm Fri 15 Feb 13
Voters need to ask themselves why so much background council support is being given to promoting this project. Someone told me that the Canal Trust shop by the library has been given to them rent free by SBC for the last few years. Is that true? If so, why? Has anyone in the upper echelons of Swindon council had/have a connection with any of the interested parties? If so, does it reflect an unfair and non objective bias? Given this article's obviously one-sided and preposterous conclusions, I think its a question which ought to be addressed.