RED TROUSERGATE: favours for the rich

Posted on April 2, 2009 by The Bristol Blogger

And so it comes to pass. Our Through the Looking Glass council does it again.

Now they’ve managed to grant planning permission to build a tower block on their own protected park land. Public land that’s not for sale; never has been for sale and never should be for sale.

Despite a clear policy – in writing – devised by our elected representatives for the protection of the Bristol and Bath Railway Path; despite a 731 signature petition; despite the advice of their own expert conservation, parks, leisure, property and transport officers; despite over £12k spent on a consultation overwhelmingly rejecting the idea, the council is set to let developers wreck a section of the Bristol and Bath Railway Path entirely on the say-so of an unelected council officer on a six-figure salary who seems more interested in doing favours to developers than doing his job looking after our interests.

At least we now know who’s really in charge at the Council House. And it’s not us or our elected politicians. It seems that what the senior officers say goes and there’s nothing we can do about it, especially as our politicians are too weak and ill-informed to stand up for either us or themselves.

What’s the point of electing politicians to make policy if council officers ignore it when asked by Merchant Venturers?

Is it any wonder nothing ever gets done in this town?

While the Venturer’s city council whipping boy, Transport and Planning boss, David “the Shifty” Bishop, is running around sorting favours out for them, what’s actually happening to the work he’s been instructed to do for us by our elected representatives?

Where’s the Local Transport Authority? The Quality Bus Contact? A transport hub at Temple Meads? Our Arena? When’s he going to get the nerve to call the South Bristol ring road a ring road rather than a link option? When’s he going to admit he’s planning – with his friends the Merchant Venturers – an assault on the city’s green belt in south west Bristol?

And ,of course, don’t forget Castle Park is now firmly in this scumbag’s sights.

Oddly, anything we want sits permanently at the bottom of Bishop’s in-tray. Anything wealthy business interests want seems to get fast-tracked to completion.

They call this democracy do they?

Posted in Bristol, Bristol and Bath Railway Path, Bristol East, Developments, Easton, Local government, Merchant Venturers, Planning, Politics | Tagged , , , , | There are 37 comments

The ego has landed

Posted on April 2, 2009 by The Bristol Blogger

In Knowle West. Earlier.

Long-suffering residents of the area were today treated to a keynote speech from none other than Public School Twit of the Year, George Ferguson, at the launch of some ill-fated, state funded council internet nonsense called ‘South Bristol Digital Neighbourhoods‘.

Apparently, we’re told, George stood up and proceeded to show the lucky delegates a film of, er … Himself! Prancing like a tit around the Tobacco Factory …

It’s not known if George brought along his guitar and treated the meeting to a couple of his self-penned tunes to round off the David Brent feel he brought to the afternoon.

Posted in Bristol, Bristol South, Culture, IT, Knowle West, Local government, Media, Merchant Venturers | Tagged , , , | There are 4 comments

Pompousthing's gone green

Posted on April 1, 2009 by The Bristol Blogger

News just in.

Bristol’s most pompous man, architect George Ferguson, has called in a firm of upmarket image consultants to undertake a drastic personal rebranding exercise for him.

The aim is to help “detoxify the brand”; “recalibrate the public profile” and “reimagine the media role” after a year of appalling adverse publicity, largely related to his role in the so-called ‘Red Trousergate‘ scandal.

Our man in the Tobbacco Factory last night conveniently overheard George engaged in deep conversation with a couple of swanky marketing PR executive consultants from London for over two hours.

And the Bristol Blogger can now reveal that George will be dropping his red trousers immediately!

“Green trousers will better focus your outstanding green credentials in the public mind and in the marketplace,” George was told.

“Red is too Stalinist.Too combative. People think you’re an egomaniac, possibly with control freak tendencies.

“You need to soften your image to something a bit more folksy. Think Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall. Everyone loves him. Have you ever considered growing a beard and spending more time in the woods with rare fungi?”

George was heard to reply, “As the leading exemplar of sustainability in this green capital, an international icon of green best practice and an all round low carbon electric car kinda guy, you’re absolutely right. It makes perfect sense for my legwear to be green.”

The Bristol Blogger can reveal George will be sporting his first pair of green trousers – likely to be 4-wale, extra thick corduroy designer hipsters in asparagus green from Bristol Harvey Nicks – at the Tobbacco Factory this morning.

The first person to send in a photo gets a can of Stella.

Posted in Bristol, CONsultants, Developments, Environment, Global warming, Green Capital, Southville | Tagged , | There are 13 comments

RED TROUSERGATE: Bishop proposing multi-million public money favour to ol' Red Trousers!

Posted on March 29, 2009 by The Bristol Blogger

Despite Bristol City Council officers still quite deliberately failing to take a decision regarding the sale of our protected public park land to developers Square Peg (Blogger passim), the controversial Chocolate Factory development planned on the land at Greenbank is back before the Development Control (South and East) Committee on 1 April.

The decision on this planning permission was deferred by the Development Control (South and East) Committee meeting on February 18 because there was no S.106 planning obligations package properly in place.

An S. 106 agreement basically lays out how much a developer is going to spend on roads, traffic calming and public infrastructure – including affordable housing – and is therefore of significant interest, value and benefit to the public.

Here’s what Ferguson and Square Peg originally signed up to deliver as part of the development last year:

• Between 10 and 30% affordable housing
• Approximately 25% of the commercial floorspace to be managed workspace, (see below for definition)
• Provision of community space within Building 6
• A contribution of £210,000 towards improvements to highway infrastructure and sustainable transport
• A contribution of £721,134 towards education facilities
• A contribution of £58,212 towards library facilities
• A contribution of £514,943.35 towards public open space
• Provision of an on site car club
• Provision of a Travel Plan
• Provision of Public Art
• Provision of a Landscaping scheme

And here’s what they’re now proposing to deliver this year:

• 10% affordable housing (a total of 25 units including a variety of unit types and tenures)
• Approximately 25% of the commercial floorspace to be managed workspace
• Provision of community space within Building 6.
• A contribution of £50,000 towards improvements to highway infrastructure and sustainable transport
• A contribution of £40,000 towards public open space
• Provision of an on site car club
• Provision of a Travel Plan
• Provision of Public Art
• Provision of off-site Landscaping schemes

This means that Ferguson and his Merchant Venturer gang – who only really want to build housing for wealthy snobs anyway – are proposing to deprive the city of up to 50 units of much-needed affordable housing; £160,000 of the money needed to get the roads up to scratch to handle the development; £720,000 worth of educational facilities they can’t be bothered with (that’s enough to go a long way towards a new primary school concerned parents please note); no money toward a library and a lot less than a tenth of the amount required to sort out public open space around their tower blocks that will cover the current open space.

The Blogger’s back-of-a-fag-packet calculation says this adds up to around £1.4m worth of improvements we were promised by Ferguson that won’t be delivered.

And remember, some of these improvements have to happen. If Ferguson and Square Peg ain’t paying the bill for highways improvements then we are.

So Ferguson and Square Peg are havin’ a laugh aren’t they? Not according to David Bishop’s planning department they’re not. Planning officers say, “an approval based on the planning obligations package offered by the applicant can be supported.”

Yes it will be supported. By us the council taxpayer forking out over a million quid to subsidise a bunch of multi-millionaire developers pulling a fast one.

Is this report an April fool?

Bishop and his planning team’s justification for this multi-million pound council tax giveaway to some of Bristol’s wealthiest men appears to be contained in a section of the committee report entitled ‘Viability Appraisal’.

This long piece of jargon-rich, tortured prose – being presented to what should be a non-specialist committee – probably breaks just about every rule of plain english the council claims to uphold. Here’s a sample:

Taking a pure approach the residual valuation would allow for a positive value to be realised for the site before the site was deemed unviable. However, to take a reasonable approach and having considered other Bristol sites where some kind of an element of “Enabling Value” is required to bring it forward, the Council’s team have modelled this in reflection of similar sites where there was only redevelopment value. While this level is not agreed by the applicant we have had to make a reasonable value judgment based on other sites in a similar position to arrive at a base value. This followed the fact that both parties agreed that the price paid is not considered relevant to the process which is confirmed in the Council’s Affordable Housing Practice Note (AHPN).

I wonder what it means? And more to the point, do the councillors on the Development Control (South and East) Committee know what it means?

After all, they wouldn’t go making a decision on the basis of a report they didn’t understand … Would they?

Posted in Bristol, Bristol and Bath Railway Path, Bristol East, CONsultants, Developments, Easton, Environment, Housing, Local government, Merchant Venturers, Planning, Politics, Transport | Tagged , , , , | There are 40 comments

Homage

Posted on March 29, 2009 by The Bristol Blogger

Plans for Evening Cancer editor, Mike Norton, to marry a British Toggenburg goat in a private ceremony this week have come under fire from VEGANS and environmental campaigners.

One opponent of Norton’s goat nuptials claims it would be “a disgrace likely to bring humiliation upon the poor goat”.

VEGANS eat no animal products, including milk and eggs.

Bristol VEGAN Doris Bonkers, 45, of Sea Mills, condemned Norton’s nuptials as environmentally unfriendly and unhealthy.

She said: “British Toggenburgs usually have sound dairy conformation as well as being strong and robust, having good longevity. The breed is one of the most popular breeds in the UK and is used on commercial goat farms where cheese is the main product. They are not suited to marriage to Group Editors of regional newspaper titles.”

But lecturer and Green campaigner Glenn Vowles, 46, of Knowle, said: “While I’m, of course, against the principle of goat weddings, there are serious questions as to whether The Bristol Blogger is making this up.”

Bristol East MP Kerry McCarthy (Labour), who is also a VEGAN, has never raised the issue – yet – of goat marriage in Parliament.

And she also had some concerns about the truth of what the Blogger was saying. She claimed we were just phoning around various people trying to find people prepared to condemn a fabricated story in order to use a witty headline.

The council’s only Green Party councillor Charlie Bolton (Southville) said: “I think you’re talking bollocks.”

Posted in Bristol, Bristol Evening Post, Media | Tagged , , , | There are 39 comments

Audit update

Posted on March 27, 2009 by The Bristol Blogger

Here’s an interesting one.

There’s a meeting of the council’s Audit Committee on 3 April 2009. And here’s item 14:

14. INTERNAL AUDIT – REPORT OF INTERNAL AUDIT ACTIVITY FOR THE PERIOD 1st DECEMBER 2008 – 28th FEBRUARY 2009

A pretty straightforward finance report you might think. But what’s this underneath?

[Exempt paragraph 7 applies – information relating to matters which could prejudice current or potential future legal proceedings]

Blimey what have they been up to now at the Counts Louse that they don’t want to tell us about?

The committee will also be considering the Annual Audit Report and Inspection Letter (pdf) for 2007/08 from the Audit Commission.

This contains a bit about the Redland Green School fiasco:

Review of the Redland Green School Project

We identified a number of weaknesses in the Council’s processes in relation to this project. These included:
• the need for the Council to formally assess the risks its faced as the project progressed and ensuring it addressed all the risks;
• limited Council overview of all the roles and responsibilities of the many parties involved;
• inadequate project management arrangements;
• inadequate cost reporting; and
• failure to adhere to the financial regulations of the Council.

These are all pretty serious findings and demonstrate the utter incompetence at the top at the Counts Louse. But the one that really catches the eye is this:

• failure to adhere to the financial regulations of the Council.

This is a straightforward staff disciplinary matter. It is gross misconduct and the perpetrator should be dismissed.

And the perpetrator is?

Why Head of Finance, Carew Reynell, who’s currently sat about fully employed on a six-figure salary awaiting a huge early retirement deal when the council eventually gets round to employing his replacement.

What exactly would it take for our councillors to actually sack one of these dodgy, scrounging, incompetent fuckers they employ on six-figure salaries?

Posted in Bristol, Developments, Education, Local government, Politics, Redland | Tagged , , , | There are 4 comments

A capital idea

Posted on March 26, 2009 by The Bristol Blogger

Chris Hutt at the Green Bristol Blog has been casting a critical eye over proposed Cycling City expenditure this week.

Meanwhile Tory Councillor Geoff Gollop is asking difficult questions (pdf) about the city’s latest money-pit, the Museum of Bristol, which is £7m overspent already in capital (ie. building) costs and has no obvious way of generating its revenue (ie. running) costs. So who pays?

Here at The Blogger, then, we’ll combine the two issues, considering how city development kingpin the Shifty Bishop, is allowed to do business on our behalf by shifting substantial pots of public money around to suit himself and his whims.

Here’s a section of a report from last week’s Resources Scrutiny Commission (pdf):

Front funding is required to deliver the public realm infrastructure associated with the Museum of Bristol project. The provision is secured through S106 agreement with developers of adjoining commercial development site, but this is now unlikely to be delivered in time for the opening of the museum.

Oh dear. No private money – as promised – to build “the public realm infrastructure” or the pavement outside as you and I might call it. So what now?

A co-ordinated approach to dealing with BRT, Cycle City and public realm for the Museum of Bristol is necessary in order to realise this aspect of the project through City Development.

Yep. You got it. Let’s pretend it’s a Cycling City project and then we can use a wedge of that money for the Museum of Bristol. Presumably on the basis that people might happen to cycle past the museum occasionally?

The fact that Cycling City is supposed to provide extra facilities for cyclists rather than fund long-planned for general improvements promised by the council’s beloved private partners will no doubt eventually be lost in some small print somewhere in a report nobody reads.

Posted in Blogging, Bristol, Conservatives, Culture, Cycling Demonstration City, Local government, Politics | Tagged , , , , | There are 55 comments

Educashon update

Posted on March 24, 2009 by The Bristol Blogger
Mike the Headless Chicken

Mike the Headless Chicken

It’s looking like headless chicken time down at the Counts Louse as Bristol City Council attempts to be seen to be doing something about the primary admissions crisis. On the surface there seems to be a lot going on. But what is it all actually about?

For instance, the Children’s Services Scrutiny Commission meeting next Monday is packed with primary admissions items.

New education exec, Clare Campion-Smith assures us in her first Executive Member report (pdf) that, “resolving the significant and important issue of primary school admissions has been a key priority for the new administration”. Unfortunately detail on how she might achieve this is noticeably scarce.

Item 14 (pdf) on the agenda is ‘Arrangements for first admission to primary and infant schools in Septmeber (sic) 2009’.

The item is accompanied by a document so long, opaque, complex, confused and bureaucratic you may well find yourself agreeing with James Barlow, who questions the value of having an authority responsible for the centralised planning and control of our schools and their admissions. Instead he wonders whether schools working independently and looking after themselves might serve us better.

If you still have the will to live after item 14 then you can always make your way to item 15 (pdf) – ‘School Admissions – How Can We Deliver Fairer Access?’.

This long series of disjointed notes taken from an exclusive seminar on school admissions held on 10 March for the great and good of the city’s education establishment creates a lot more heat than light but does contain this useful observation courtesy of Marius Frank, Head of Bedminster Down School:

In October, a landmark meeting took place, between Principles, Headteachers and Governors from every Secondary School and Academy in Bristol, along with senior council and educational officials.

People were asked to share their reflections with the group. Roger White stood up in turn, and stated that when every person in the room sent their sons and daughters to Bristol state schools, this would send a powerful signal to all Bristol parents that change has arrived. Roger sends his children to Ashton Park School, where he is also a Governor. You could have heard a pin drop. There was much gazing at feet and then shuffling on chairs. Clearly, this was a social challenge too far for the august group gathered there, but, in an instant, the silence defined Bristol’s problems: we remain a socially divided city.

There it is then. The people in charge, taking all the decisions, spending all the money and poncing around at upmarket seminars aren’t even using the schools they insist on running. What better indictment of a rotten, failing system is there?

Possibly this: the minutes of the hastily arranged meeting between parents, who don’t have a school place for their five year olds in September, and various city council education big wigs last Monday.

Here’s the highlights:

The Authority is fully committed to get it right and offered parents an unreserved apology for the current situation.

The local authority failed to communicate with parents clearly.

LA failed to ensure sufficient capacity of school places prior to advising parents the outcome of their school application on 30th January 2009.

LA needs to improve data collection informing school place planning and manage funds available.

LA is resolved to get it right for Reception 2010 intake and learn from mistakes this year.

This year LA has been overwhelmed by demand for school places in certain area of the city.

The immediate problem is a significant increase in demand for school places over the supply and really the LA should have known about this.

Confirmed that 5% – 9% more 3 and 4 year old requiring places than anticipated.

Surely something has to give here? We’re paying out millions a year for a desperately failing bureaucratic educational management structure, where those who run it make a good living while those who use it suffer.

Meanwhile the only proposals emerging from the Counts Louse are more of the same. Is that what we need?

Posted in Bishopston, Bristol, Education, Local government, Politics | Tagged , , , , , , | There are 13 comments

A strong case of bullshit

Posted on March 23, 2009 by The Bristol Blogger

Bristol Labour Party’s education policy has become a bit clearer this week.

Having already created a national laughing stock out of the city’s secondary education provision some time ago, they’ve followed this up by failing to provide enough primary school places for new kids starting school this year, despite being aware of a growing problems for years.

So having gloriously fucked it all up – not least by employing the half-witted Heather Tomlinson on a six-figure salary for five years to run the city’s education services further in to the ground for them – Bristol Labour now unveil an intriguing third prong in their education strategy.

And er … That’s to threaten any poor parent blighted by their failed education service with legal action if they dare complain about the shambles. I kid you not!

As promised, here is former Labour leader Helen Holland’s response to a Bishopston parent who had the cheek to fume directly at her about her extraordinary decision to cancel the building of a desperately needed new primary school at Ashley Down just prior to her embarking on a bizarre PR escapade with Gloucestershire County Cricket Club who wanted the land earmarked for the school for their extra car parking:

From: Helen Holland [mailto:helen.holland@bristol.gov.uk]
Sent: 18 March 2009 18:39
To: Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx
Cc: Stephen McNamara
Subject: RE: Primary Schools Crisis in Bristol – putting children first

Dear Mr Xxxxxx

I have been waiting for you to write to me with your apology for what you stated in your e-mail below to Cllr Derek Pickup, ie that I attended a parliamentary reception for Gloucestershire County Cricket Club, and further that I did not declare my attendance at this reception.

This is completely untrue. I was not at the reception, and therefore obviously could not declare attendance.

I have taken preliminary legal advice and am advised that I would have a very strong case against you, which I intend to pursue unless as I hope, that you will take the opportunity as soon as possible to apologise to me, and to put right what is a blatant untruth, and which has fuelled some very unfortunate spin-offs. Please confirm that you have corrected this defamation by writing to all recipients of the original email and please confirm that you will not repeat this defamation.

Please also note that I have referred your correspondence to the Head of Legal Services in the City Council.

I look forward to hearing from you very soon.

Helen Holland

Cllr Helen Holland

Labour Councillor – Whitchurch Park

Leader of the Labour Group
Bristol City Council
The Council House
College Green
Bristol
BS1 5TR

tel/fax: +44 (0)117 987 2238
e-mail: helen.holland@bristol.gov.uk

With such an absurd concoction of pomposity, bluster and stupidity it’s hard to know where to start. But you have to wonder who on earth Helen is getting her “legal advice” from? Sid and Doris Bonkers of Sea Mills?

For starters, it might help if Helen’s “legal advice” could actually fucking read. Helen and her “advice” seem to think that her correspondent claimed she had “attended a parliamentary reception for Gloucestershire County Cricket Club, and further more … did not declare … attendance at this reception.”

But they haven’t said this. The correspondent actually quotes word-for-word directly from the website of JBP, Helen’s cricket club friend’s upmarket PR firm. And what they said – and continue to say – is:

“Attendance of over 100 members of the political and business community at the Bristol reception, including explicit endorsement in the media and at the event itself from Cllr Helen Holland, Leader of Bristol City Council.”

No mention of “a parliamentary reception” there. It refers only to a “Bristol reception”. It rather looks like, behind all the bluster and the third rate legal threats, there’s a good old fashioned non denial denial going on here.

That’s where you loudly and proudly deny something you haven’t been accused of – eg. attending a Parliamentary reception – in order to avoid addressing what you have been accused of – eg. attending a reception in Bristol and not declaring it in the council’s register of members’ interests.

So did Helen attend a Gloucestershire County Cricket Club reception in Bristol or not? And why doesn’t she want to say?

Still, while we wait for the answer, we can always look forward to this sensational and innovative defamation action Helen and her “legal advice” intend to pursue as they have – in their seriously warped view – a “strong case”.

A strong case of delusion perhaps? Do they really intend to attempt to sue someone for not saying something they have? That should be quite a day in the High Court, if a tad on the expensive side for Helen.

Could someone quietly tell Helen you usually find the super rich fighting defamation cases in the High Court, not deluded teachers from Southville?

And what’s Helen hoping to achieve by referring this correspondence to the Head of Legal Services at the council? He’ll know sod-all about defamation and there’s even less he can do about it. Local authorities can’t sue for defamation. They’re not a person .

Surely not just another empty and desperate threat from Helen to try to cover-up her miserable failings and her deliberate policy depriving Bristol’s parents of school places this year while her corporate friends’ car parking needs get met in full?

Posted in Bishopston, Bristol, Education, Labour Party, Local government, Politics | Tagged , , , , | There are 20 comments

Modernism in Flax Bourton

Posted on March 22, 2009 by The Bristol Blogger

Stopped along the A370 at Flax Bourton today to take a look at the modernist houses there.

No really. They’re off the main road, tucked between the olde worlde cottages of the original village and a new executive homes development.

Dunno much about them but there’s five of them on a private road looking out across fields towards the 370. It’s a restful place.

Apparently they were built in the early 70s by a firm called Artist Constructor, which was basically two brothers – Tim and Bob Organ.

Anyone who knows any more, feel free to get in touch.

The ever dependable Fray Bentos, of course, has a picture of one (above).

Posted in Bristol, Culture | Tagged , , , , | There are 3 comments