Forum Replies Created

  • Author
  • in reply to: Under 18's and self determination #144258


    I think I realise and the general population realise why Tories and closet Tories are against lowering the voting age to 16 for elections.
    In the last couple of years we as a nation have witnessed a dramatic rise in social conscience as illustrated by the number of young people who ARE engaging in political matters and taking a stance on the total inequalities purveyed by the encumbent government.
    I watched David Lidington at last Wednesday’s PMQ’s where he floundered when trying to put a reasoned argument as to why Tories do not support the proposed change. What he failed to mention was that Tory party members have a right to vote when electing a new party leader at 15. Is it so different to voting for a Member of Parliament to represent his constituents
    The fact of the matter is, is that the traditional blue rinse, old electors are drawing ever closer to drawing their last breath and the Tories are petrified that their traditional supporters are diminishing on a daily basis. Fact is, it scares them to death.

    Th suggestion made by Alun that persons aged 16/17 be permitted to vote if they are paying taxes rates is obscene in the extreme. Perhaps we should disenfranchise those that in receipt of state benefits or earning less than £20K to help ensure that the Tories would be more likely to retain a tenuous foothold on power.
    We are all citizens of this Country and for the older population to shape the future of our descendants is both corrupt and morally wrong. The future belongs to our children and our children’s children.

    • This reply was modified 5 months, 1 week ago by  BenjaminM. Reason: Spell check
    in reply to: snow in wrexham #141775


    Yet another example of a half cocked attempt to discredit teaching staff.
    If any of the ‘contributors’ to this post had bothered to find out what must be taken into account when the decision is made to close or partially close a school, they may not have bothered to air misguided views.
    Child welfare: Children can get to and from school safely,the site is safe, there are enough staff to supervise effectively.
    Health and safety is given a high priority in law so potentially hazardous conditions such as playgrounds that have turned into an ice rink or insufficient heating can also be a factor.
    It seems to me that at this time, head teachers or a directive from WCBC have more than sufficient grounds to authorise the closure or is the real reason for the moan that it inconveniences some parents who like to offload their children for the day?

    in reply to: Council Sickness Policy £308,505 saving not to progressed: #140589


    This does not seem right that residents are having cuts at a time when it looks like the Council staff are being protected.

    Protected!!! What planet are you from? Jobs have been lost right left and centre and Council employees haven’t had a salary increase for 8 years, How are they being protected?
    Are the vast majority of them not residents too and subject to the same cuts that we all are?
    I really do despair at the mindset of those with a me, me, me attitude.

    in reply to: 20 difficult to let properties demolished #140587


    “If they had a notice period in the contract why didn’t they just give notice?”

    Yet another example of an off the top of the head comment that has no logic attached to it whatsoever.
    1. If the Council were to implement such a draconian measure (if indeed it was at all possible)where would the social housing tenants be moved to?
    2.Are any of the above detractors aware of ANY reason or example of where ANY of the tenants have broken their side of the tenancy agreement.
    3. As far as I am aware, it seems that the move was thrust upon them and they had little opportunity to do anything other than comply.
    4. Is it not right, proper and in the interest of natural justice that the tenants should be equitably compensated for their upheaval from their home?
    5. I can just imagine the stink that would be raised by a home owner if their property was subject to a Compulsary Purchase Order. They would expect the moon, the sun and the stars in way of compensation. Or are social housing tenants of a lower order and can be treated differently?

    I think I can detect a whiff of that from certain of the above ‘contributions’.

    in reply to: What do people think ? #139847


    Totally with MP1953 on this one for the very reason stated.

    And Nen, if disabled people are working, that is even more of a reason why they should pay for parking. The blue badge concession is one of the most widely abused systems in existence and the sooner everyone pays or nobody pays the better it will be.

    in reply to: Drunken/druggie Idiots #138824


    Having read the report regarding Police wasting 2 hours waiting for a gang of youths to disperse in Brymbo, none having apparently committed an arrestable offence, wouldn’t their time be better utilised by tackling situations similar to the one highlighted by Rex Ham above?

    I am sick and tired of reading plans made by ‘gold command’ that never seem to reach any positive remedy or solution to the problem. They are allowed to pollute the environment both physically and by their very presence, seemingly with tacit approval from those in whom the responsibility lies for resolution.

    in reply to: Still wasting our money, does anyone care? #135142


    “Still wasting our money, does anyone care?”

    Not in the slightest. This facility has been in existence since 1975 by virtue of the Employment Protection Act 1975, further endorsed by Trade Union and Labour (Consolidation) Act 1992 and again by the Employment Act 2002 and applies equally to both the public and private sector.

    Are you and Janet Finch Saunders actually suggesting that Public sector employees should not have the same rights as those in the Private sector?

    I fully understand that during the summer recess AM’s and MP’s try to hang their hat on some obscure minutiae that has little relevance or cost implication just to keep their name ‘up there’ and why Dick, if he is who I think he is would endorse such drivel.

    in reply to: Theresa May's 'visit to Wrexham' #134435


    It seems that may have just finally nailed their colours to the mast.

    Randomly digging up a post to have another go at the Conservatives!

    I’m completely fed up with the Leaders biased coverage over the years and always liked yours, but I’m starting to get a bit fed up with this – especially as you don’t bother hiding your bias anymore!

    How anyone has the audacity to come up with such a stupid observation is beyond me.

    Perhaps the writer has an extremely selective memory and can only read posts through blue tinted spectacles. From another perspective, I was appalled by the incessant coverage that the Theresa May’s candidate for Wrexham received for months and months prior to the General Election. Perhaps that same coverage has dwindled because the ‘good works’ have not been happening or publicity is not a necessity at this time?

    I think that now the election is over and the Cons have nothing worthy to say or be reported on, the equilibrium has returned and have quite effectively displayed a politically neutral stance.

    Carry on reporting as you see fit Rob and ignore the the rantings of a supporter of a party that has reached terminal velocity in destroying itself, so so effectively.


    99Dylan, your inability to understand the written word never fails to astound me. Once again, in your constant pursuit to sensationalise and denigrate anything positive, you choose to be selective in your quotes. In this instance, you conveniently choose to omit the final two paragraphs of the article.
    To balance your extremely negative summation, I will add those two paragraphs to add perspective:

    “The great thing about this is you learn …..and earn money.
    A lot of people who follow this route secure an apprenticeship or employment through their work placements”

    That puts a different perspective on it, doesn’t it?

    in reply to: New Housing Development for Llay #133509


    Hope this thread does not develop to the interminable length the initial discussions on this topic. The appeal was lodged, objections heard and a decion made by the Planning Inspectorate. The fact of the matter is, is that the development will in all likelihood go ahead. No amount of bleating and gnashing of teeth will change that decision. The people who consider themselves to be detrimentally affected will just have to accept it and turn the negatives into a positive for themselves, LLay and surrounding areas.

    • This reply was modified 1 year ago by  BenjaminM. Reason: Word change
    • This reply was modified 1 year ago by  BenjaminM.
Content is user generated and is not moderated before posting. All content is viewed and used by you at your own risk and does not warrant the accuracy or reliability of any of the information displayed. The views expressed on these Forums and social media are those of the individual contributors.
Complaint? Please use the report post tools or contact .