Jacksons Landing

[Lord Elpus]

I was at the F&P meeting this morning, Paul Thompson asked Director Denise Ogden one very telling question; he asked how many enquiries HBC had received regarding Jackson's landing from developers etc. since HBC took ownership.

Denise Ogden replied non she was aware of.  Perhaps when Ray Wells and co spout off about the number of people/companies who were interested in Jackson's Landing they should pass the information on to the relevant Officer, unless of course he was lying through his Tory teeth.

[Land Phil]

That deserves a follow up.

[fred c]

I was at the F&P meeting this morning, Paul Thompson asked Director Denise Ogden one very telling question; he asked how many enquiries HBC had received regarding Jackson's landing from developers etc. since HBC took ownership.

Denise Ogden replied non she was aware of.  Perhaps when Ray Wells and co spout off about the number of people/companies who were interested in Jackson's Landing they should pass the information on to the relevant Officer, unless of course he was lying through his Tory teeth.

Why then does the video on the previous page show Lying Ste saying there are developers interested in the site, there is something fundementally broken within HBC, we have a ruling cadre that tell more lies than "Billy Liar", both inside & outside of the council chamber.

I would suggest that Denise Ogden has a serious conversation with her Boss about why lying councillors are placing Officers of the council in invidious positions, she should also bring up the point of the HBC Press Officer issuing statements that are palpably untrue.

[Lord Elpus]

I was at the F&P meeting this morning, Paul Thompson asked Director Denise Ogden one very telling question; he asked how many enquiries HBC had received regarding Jackson's landing from developers etc. since HBC took ownership.

Denise Ogden replied non she was aware of.  Perhaps when Ray Wells and co spout off about the number of people/companies who were interested in Jackson's Landing they should pass the information on to the relevant Officer, unless of course he was lying through his Tory teeth.

Why then does the video on the previous page show Lying Ste saying there are developers interested in the site, there is something fundementally broken within HBC, we have a ruling cadre that tell more lies than "Billy Liar", both inside & outside of the council chamber.

I would suggest that Denise Ogden has a serious conversation with her Boss about why lying councillors are placing Officers of the council in invidious positions, she should also bring up the point of the HBC Press Officer issuing statements that are palpably untrue.

For clarity she did also say there had been one recent enquiry from a hotel group.  The point is it shows there had been no direct interest to HBC before this regardless of the spin (lies) told by Senior Councillors.

[seaton]

Funding has been approved, in today's Mail, no comments allowed ?

[steveL]

Normally these decisions would now go to the full council so that they can be debated by all 33 councillors but they are not allowing this to happen this time.

It was quite comical, really. At the F&P meeting yesterday, CAB said that he wanted the £40,000 cost to be taken from a different pot to the one first agreed, and although this was agreed, this 'change' still needs to go to full council for ratification. CAB thought he was on safe ground believing the next full council meeting, which is in September, was after the 19th, the date set for demolition, but he got it wrong; the meeting is scheduled for the 8th.

They're on dodgy ground as the original decision to purchase Jacksons Landing was made by Full Council on a majority vote. Obviously, the decision to demolish it should therefore also be a decision of full council.

To me, the elephant in the room here, is the question why, after years of standing empty, the decision to demolish the building is being rushed through with such haste and without all councillors being given their chance to have their say.

Their is a lot of deceit surrounding this e.g. SAB's claim on TV of developers queueing up when Denise Ogden has admitted that this isn't true - that in itself should warrant a full council debate.

[seaton]

Normally these decisions would now go to the full council so that they can be debated by all 33 councillors but they are not allowing this to happen this time.

It was quite comical, really. At the F&P meeting yesterday, CAB said that he wanted the £40,000 cost to be taken from a different pot to the one first agreed, and although this was agreed, this 'change' still needs to go to full council for ratification. CAB thought he was on safe ground believing the next full council meeting, which is in September, was after the 19th, the date set for demolition, but he got it wrong; the meeting is scheduled for the 8th.

They're on dodgy ground as the original decision to purchase Jacksons Landing was made by Full Council on a majority vote. Obviously, the decision to demolish it should therefore also be a decision of full council.

To me, the elephant in the room here, is the question why, after years of standing empty, the decision to demolish the building is being rushed through with such haste and without all councillors being given their chance to have their say.

Their is a lot of deceit surrounding this e.g. SAB's claim on TV of developers queueing up when Denise Ogden has admitted that this isn't true - that in itself should warrant a full council debate.

Steve forgive my ignorance irrespective if there is a full Council debate nothing will change, it will be voted through as Labour are the majority party, none of them would dare vote against it or would they ?

[steveL]

You're right, of course, but that doesn't mean the public shouldn't be made aware of the under-hand tactics being employed to push this through or to exercise their right to see such a controversial move fully debated. Many people in town live in wards where none of their own councillors were able even to take part in this decision.


As for the Labour Group, there is a growing number of Labour councillors seriously embarrassed by the way the likes of CAB and Cranney are running this council. However, while they are willing enough to say so in private conversations they also seem to lack the balls to do anything about it. Personally, I'm not sure which deserve more contempt.

[Hartlepudlion]

It is up to you, the people to show your displeasure.

It will be nearly twentytwo months before you have a chance through the ballot box. The only option now is to keep telling all three of your Cllrs that you do/do not want a particular action that is being proposed. If enough of us do it enough times they may just listen and change.

I know, the leadership will magician support from the air but that can be challenged by other Councillors who can tell them to put up or shut up.

Councillors are your link to the Council Chamber especially now as they have effectively stopped questions in Council meetings.

The only way to change things is to be involved.

[testing times]

From what I know of council contracts, which isn't much admittedly, wouldn't any contract for demolition have to be put out to tender after it had been decided to go ahead? There is something very strange here because, as I understand it, they were even to name the date that demolition would begin i.e. 19th September. Does that not mean that all planning and organisation had been completed, a contractor decided upon and a date set all before the Regeneration Committee Meeting which we are told gave the go-ahead.


Just supposing that the committee had not given the go-ahead. Wouldn't someone be looking very silly at this moment?


Isn't obvious that decisions are being made outside of due process and that it looks like these decisions are being by a select few people or even by one person and that the committee system, which we were told would be so democratic, is nothing but a total sham?

[Foggy]

The whole thing stinks and the smell level is increasing on a daily basis.  Someone seems very desperate to keep it quiet and push it through very quickly. 

It will be interesting to see which demolition company have been 'chosen' for the job.

[fred c]

Hartlepool is under the control of a dictatorship, TT is bang on, it was a done deal even before Fridays chaotic meeting, I spoke to a labour councillor immediately after that meeting, I got the distinct impression that he was both embarrased & disgusted at what happened during the meeting.

I believe there are a number of competent & civic minded councillors in the Labour Ruling Group, it is now time for them to stand up & take control of the towns Labour Party, back from the 'The Self Servers'.

Just a point on the Demolition Contract......There is likely to be an awful lot of 'Scrap' from the building, that scrap, will be worth a significant amount of money.......... The question needs to be posed..... Who exactly, will get that 'Scrap Money'?

[mk1]

Just for a moment I thought it was....................

[steveL]

. . . a blue whale?

[not4me]

I think the present building is a decent design that has similar features to the yacht club. All they need to is spruce it up a bit - better than looking at a concrete slab for years which is what is going to happen if these ars*h**es have their way.