Jacksons Landing/Council Meeting

[steveL]

Well I attended my first full meeting of HBC last night and to use a well coined phrase - "You couldn't make it up"
With the LabTor alliance doing no more than putting their hands up on cue.  On the Labour side all we had were a group of people, the majority of which, didn't really seem to know what was going on but fortunately Paul Thompson had been positioned so far away from them that they couldn't find out even if they wanted to. 
I too thought the Chair was intimidating, which isn't very helpful for new Councillors, but I guess is very helpful for the LabTors.
If there are any Labour councillors reading this could I implore you to look at what the people who you represent want and stop voting blindly to satisfy the egos of some of your colleagues.
If Paul Thompson hadn't been there we would of all been home by 8 o'clock - keep it up Paul and remember "Nil Carburundum Non Illigitimum"
Can't wait for the next installment of The Adventures of Paul Thompson and HBC

The bias of the Chairman has long since been a 'given' at council meetings; it's really a question of degree.

We've had a range of Chairman from the dithering, the sweet but useless, the vindictive and the illiterate but all have come pre-packaged with the mistaken belief that because Labour has the majority in the council it therefore has the right to control how meetings are run. When Mary Fleet was Chairman, she visibly and audibly took her instructions directly from Christopher sat closest to her

If you compare the Chairmanship with the role of the Speaker in the House of Commons, The Speaker can come from any party and there is a convention over sharing the role out over time. In HBC, Labour make sure that they ALWAYS have one of their own as Chairman.

You might have noticed that Ged Hall's minor rebellion last night was followed quickly by an on-the-hoof decision by Christopher to remove him from the Children's Services Committee - dissent is not allowed.

I can better demonstrate this by sharing a question that was once put to Carl Richardson by a fellow Labour Councillor,

"If there was an issue where there was a clear conflict between the interests of the Party and the interests of Hartlepool, which would you choose?"

Carl's Answer? "The Party, every time."

[Foggy]

I couldn't make the meeting last night unfortunately but looking forward to watching the footage.  Although it sounds like it's cringe worthy in places (as usual).  Did anyone from here film it or will I have to wait for the council's version of events?

I'm curious about what happened with Ged?  Are we talking proper rebellion or did he just give CAB a dirty look? Let's face it, that would be enough for him to be banished.  I'm interested as I've never heard the bloke speak in a meeting before.

[Inspector Knacker]

I find the concept of political party's in local government abhorrent.
Why would anyone with an ounce of decency join a group who demands loyalty to it over the interests of the community it represents.
I find even more astounding that anyone can suspend their conscience or common sense to meekly obey the party line above all else. To cravenly comply with orders begs the question, why isn't local politics cleansed of party politics completely with each councillor required to be a bona fide a resident in the ward they represent.

[Lord Elpus]

I find the concept of political party's in local government abhorrent.
Why would anyone with an ounce of decency join a group who demands loyalty to it over the interests of the community it represents.
I find even more astounding that anyone can suspend their conscience or common sense to meekly obey the party line above all else. To cravenly comply with orders begs the question, why isn't local politics cleansed of party politics completely with each councillor required to be a bona fide a resident in the ward they represent.

Because that involves a degree of selflessness that is absent from many HBC Councillors, certainly the likes of Mad Dog, the SCAB's, Richardson, Cranney and others (IMO) see being a Councillor as a meal ticket which excludes them from having to get a proper job.  In fact in my opinion many of them are unemployable and not capable of working in a modern real life work situation.

One only has to listen to the tripe that the likes of Richardson and Mad Dog come out with to realise that they appear to have little grasp of life for most families in the real world. 

Resentment complex and vindictive actions are not just limited to those outside the Labour Group as poor Ged appears to be only too well aware.  My advise to Ged is tell them to go a get photographed with a big camera and walk away from the Labour group, you'll not regret it.  (remember you know where the bodies are buried).

[fred c]

I find the concept of political party's in local government abhorrent.
Why would anyone with an ounce of decency join a group who demands loyalty to it over the interests of the community it represents.
I find even more astounding that anyone can suspend their conscience or common sense to meekly obey the party line above all else. To cravenly comply with orders begs the question, why isn't local politics cleansed of party politics completely with each councillor required to be a bona fide a resident in the ward they represent.

Because that involves a degree of selflessness that is absent from many HBC Councillors, certainly the likes of Mad Dog, the SCAB's, Richardson, Cranney and others (IMO) see being a Councillor as a meal ticket which excludes them from having to get a proper job.  In fact in my opinion many of them are unemployable and not capable of working in a modern real life work situation.

One only has to listen to the tripe that the likes of Richardson and Mad Dog come out with to realise that they appear to have little grasp of life for most families in the real world. 

Resentment complex and vindictive actions are not just limited to those outside the Labour Group as poor Ged appears to be only too well aware.  My advise to Ged is tell them to go a get photographed with a big camera and walk away from the Labour group, you'll not regret it.  (remember you know where the bodies are buried).

I'm not a particular fan of Ged Hall, but the way Cwissy Jung Un & his commiserate have treated him since his illness, says more about their character than it does about his.

They spout socialist principles, solidarity, loyalty, comradeship....... the LabMob couldn't even spell them..... Here's hoping Ged does open Pandoras Box & takes the lot of them down.

[steveL]

Nothing really happened with Ged other than some kind of c**k-up with the puppet strings. When CAB pulled on the string, all but Ged's arms went up; when he let go - Ged's arm popped up. It happened several times during the course of the night.

I have never seen Ged laugh before but when the Bishop Auckland Councillor described Jacksons Landing as being so dilapidated that it sounded as if it was about to fall down, Thompson raised the prospect of attendees at next weeks We Are Family risking the possibility of a disaster and questioned whether people were OK with that.

There was a bit of a 'oh s**t' moment as Lindridge helped Hunter to extract his foot from his mouth

Ged evidently found it quite amusing

[DRiddle]

Possibly worth reminding ourselves of this.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZMImqAhlpk&feature=youtu.be

Note the then CEO of Hartlepool Councils comment 19 seconds into the video. Jacksons landing is "a good building".

So 'good' we bought for for £1.4 million, let it rot for 3 years and we'll now pay £40,000 (or is it £80,000) to pull it down.

God knows what Labours councillors would do with a "bad building".   

[jeffh]

There was also a bit of classic comedy when Cranney did his "Note what I wrote" a la Eric & Ernie - even had the diction - brilliant

[steveL]

Hartlepool Mail 23rd November, 2013

"Conservative group leader Ray Martin-Wells said: "While £1.5m is a tremendous amount, I believe it represents good value for money and I understand that several developers have already offered the council a profit should we wish to quickly turn the building around.

The aim is to have identified an alternative use or to sell it on by December 2014."

The full Mail article is well worth a read if you want to know who proved to be right and who proved to be wrong. It's also worth noting that the people who got it so badly wrong last time are the same people telling us that they are the ones to trust over what happens next.

Read more at: http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/last-ditch-bid-to-save-jacksons-landing-building-fails-1-8116421

[admin]

had to pinch this one off the Mail. Made me smile...

"Why not use it as an exhibition/storage area for all of the paraphernalia associated with previous 'Visions', All those glossy brochures, flip charts, artists impressions and Power Point presentations have to be stored somewhere so why not put them on display.

Jacksons Landing itself was a 'Vision' at one time. Then there's the Cafe Culture that Church Street was supposed to turn into after £37m of City Challenge money was spent. Remember the trams that were going to run from Church Street to the Marina? Or the Floating Hotel idea that sank before the ink of the artist impression was properly dry. Let's not forget the 'Ecology Park' and wind turbines that were going to be built on Spion Kop or the Cleveland Forest that was going to surround Hartlepool with a forested nature reserve ...... the list is endless, it really is and I can't think of a better use for the building than as a museum of fanciful, unfunded 'Visions' dedicated to the art of non-joined up thinking and the profligate waste of public money.

Read more at: http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/last-ditch-bid-to-save-jacksons-landing-building-fails-1-8116421

[testing times]

Victoria Harbour?

[fred c]

It amazes me that the Mob always seem so put out by the criticism of members of the public when they announce another Vision / Masterplan, surely it can't be a surprise to them.

The completion rate of the (dozens) of proposed visions / masterplans stands at precisely 0%

1 mistake is an accident, 2 mistakes is coincidence, 3 mistakes is stupidity, that just about sums up the way the ruling group approach spending council tax payers money.

How much has the consultancy & architectural fees cost HBC over the last 5 or 6 years, it would be a teling statistic, unfortunately one that will never be made public.

[marky]

Nicely put but not according to his register of interests. A property developer who declares no income, no companies or directorships and no property other than where he lives? Those visiting the Marina car parks aren't the only ones smelling a rat   

[for fawkes sake]

Victoria Harbour?

The footbridge to the Headland

[Hartlepudlion]

Ffs. And why was the footbridge abandoned.......... ... because they didn't realise that ships actually used the harbour. Building it would have closed the port. Not a brain cell between them.......unless it has £ signs ........just spend, spend never mind the cost! After all, it's not their money!