Forum Replies Created
If you care to look back to anytime where contentious applications are considered, you will find that a number of Councillors, rather than nailing their colours to the mast and voting as they feel appropriate, abstain.
I don’t think for one second that any Councillor is unable to form an opinion one way or the other after lengthy debate, but take the easy way out and abstain so that the for or against lobby cannot hold them to account.
What disturbs me more,is the number of Councillors absent from meetings that they are scheduled (with plenty of prior notification) to attend. 7 members of the Planning Committee absent is not satisfactory, irrespective of questionable reasons given.
More should be expected and demanded from them.
Not just in WCBC, but generally, when HR departments were known as Personnel Departments the focus was on the person, their welfare, working conditions and displaying a duty of care.
Along came national austerity and PR depts almost overnight became HR – Human Resources where individuals were no longer valued as an individual who contributed to the good of the organisation but rather as a commodity that can be used or dispensed with at will.
I can fully understand why individuals need time away from their labours when, due to cutbacks and increased workload, where management are expecting to get 2 pints from a 1 pint pot.
Sickness levels are unlikely to decrease to any palpable degree whilst underfunding and understaffing are now considered to be the new norm.
What are you on Bubble? What sort of personal medical information is handled irresponsibly?
It doesn’t take a medical professional to identify malingerers and time wasters, in fact it is well documented that a significant proportion of A&E attendees have no need to be there anyway. Drunks with hangovers, those who have spent too long in the sun,those that are too mean to buy over the counter medication – the list is endless.
AMA makes a very valid point, the place is teeming with those who should seek assistance elsewhere. The term Accident and Emergency means just that!
As far as ‘reporting it’, how childish.
I don’t think that is the most sensible suggestion. A TIO should be centrally located where people tend to head for. I cannot see how locating it on the periphery of the town would do anything to enhance the visitor experience of Wrexham. Yes, it may possibly attract a few more visitors to the white elephant, but adequate signage would have the same effect, assuming its on their ‘must see’ list.
The headline for this topic is, I think misleading! Aaron Banks does not run rings around anyone at this hearing. All he does is throw out insults when he is cornered.
Totally agree. Banks stated before the hearing that he had every intention of being disruptive. All it did show to anyone who watched was an arrogant,ignorant man who resorted to insult after insult when put into an indefensible position. Walking out before the end of the session to attend a luncheon appointment was the ultimate show of contempt.
Ian Lucas behaved in a calm and dignified manner and should be applauded for not rising to the bait.
Even worse than the cost of the new frontage is the recommendation by Pritchard to keep the Executive Board at 10 members for the next 12 months and that the recommendation is being voted on by……..you’ve guessed it… the Executive Board!! Talk about turkeys voting for Christmas. We as Council Tax payers MUST do something to end the autocratic rule of WCBC where 10 hand picked, like minded individuals hold all the cards and the remaining Councillors have to suck it up time after time without any democratic recourse.
The merging of just 2 portfolios into 1 would ensure the availability of a very much needed service to the citizens of Wrexham.May 22, 2018 at 7:19 am in reply to: Will Cllr Pritchard loose the Leadership of the Council tomorrow!! #149431
If the regular apres meeting coffee jaunt into Wrexham town centre yesterday by the four riders of the apocalypse is anything to go by, I wouldn’t hold your breath. I think that you will see very little change except for greater roles for the already identified sycophants.May 3, 2018 at 8:35 am in reply to: Rough Sleeping Censorship on Wrexham Town Matters Group #148506
I have had several posts deleted from ‘Wrexham Matters – almost instantaneously. The reason? Because I have had the audacity to post ideas or observations contrary to the ‘hail fellow well met,backslapping ideology of what has almost become a personal fiefdom.
Matt is absolutely correct in all his assertions and observations and I totally endorse what he has to say.
I suppose it could be argued that there are two interpretations to the meaning of the word ‘matters’, the one that I would use – things appertaining to Wrexham in the most general sense and the other – statements that only portray Wrexham in glowing terms.
Perhaps it is encumber on Nigel now that he has decided to be the draconian arbiter on censorship, which of the loose definitions he expects contributors to adhere to. Then we may see the worth or otherwise of making pertinent comment.
The CEO of Sainsbury’s on TV this morning gave a categoric assurance that if the merger was to go ahead, that there would be no store closures or job losses as a result.
He went on to say that prices of staple products are likely to reduce in price because of the joint ability to negotiate more favourable terms with major suppliers.
It is purely semantic as the merger is unlikely to receive approval from the Monopolies and Mergers Commission, according to knowledgeable commentators.
I cringe whenever I read how great a town Wrexham is to live, work and shop, especially the shop element of the argument.
The town is inundated with pound shops and charity stores, a situation that is likely to be further exacerbated if the application by Nightingale House is approved by our illustrious Planning Committee.
Whilst I have every respect for the good work carried out by Nightingale House, enough is enough!
The design and access statement in support of the application reads thus:
“It is considered that the proposed change of use will offer suitable commercial premises that will encourage visits to the town centre itself and extend the time spent in the application building” Who writes this stuff? Unadulterated bull!!!
Perhaps Nigel Lewis et al would be kind enough to let us all now how this proposal fits in with his vision of Wrexham being a ‘great’ place to shop when virtually 1 in 4 outlets are occupied by premises mentioned in the opening paragraph?
Complaint? Please use the report post tools or contact Wrexham.com .