BenjaminM
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Alun, I thought even you would appreciate the quote from the Godfather of Economics. You may call it conjecture, a truth nonetheless!
jimbow, of course I am not advocating that only consultants should post on here as valid ideas and suggestions have and are being made on a whole range of topics on this forum.
With regard to this particular thread, the most sensible contribution to my mind, has been made by Adam who states:
“Markets should create footfall not have to rely on it. I people are not making the very short detours from the Main Street then there is a clear problem with what the market is offering”
It is very easy to blame WCBC for all the ills apparently befalling market traders but it is in the market traders hands to provide the product that customers want, the aesthetics of the building to my mind is a fudging irrelevance.With some small exceptions,the markets generally offer low priced, low quality product that customers do not find it lucrative to deviate from established footfall routes to visit.
With regard to the references made in this thread to the Consultants report stating the obvious, it is necessary on occasions to state the obvious as they are all too frequently overlooked, and therefore the foundation of the solution is built on sand.Unless there is a fundamental change in what traders are offering, irrespective of the cosmetic changes envisaged, the demise of the markets in Wrexham is a prospect for the short to mid term rather than having any semblance of a long term future.
You are not very keen on anyone expressing an opinion that differs from your own, are you? Not the first time you have called me patronising. My posts are clear in meaning and intent without having the need to resort to florid plagiarisms.
And thank you for your enlightening potted C.V.
I have an inherent distrust of comments made that are either pure conjecture or those made from a partisan viewpoint.
As oft is your wont to cite quotations in your posts, let me give you a quote to savour, which may illustrate my point :-
“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.” Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations.
I have far greater respect for the advice obtained from a specialist third party ( who have only their fee and reputation to maintain) than from people who may know a little about a lot but lack the in depth knowledge to realise full potential from a situation.It is indeed an honour to read the comments of experts on this thread whose range of knowledge extends from estate management to lift specifications. That is to say, a little knowledge of everything, but it would appear, mastery of none.
Where has the Council ever stated that it has ‘experts’ in every discipline under the sun?
The topic in question is a one off project, that to be successful, needs the input of people who are specialists in that particular field.
It with some disdain that I read the comment “probably because they produce the results the Council wants” when replying to 99Dylan’s comments regarding the alternate report carried out at Plas Madoc where the implication is that theirs must be the correct interpretation. Or maybe it is because that it what the Group wanted? We may never know!
A number of years ago, I was advising on the implementation of ISO 9000 (Quality Systems) in commercial and industrial organisations. Why? Because the depth of in house knowledge was insufficient to complete the task effectively- so they bought in. Result – successful registration!
It is very similar to visiting a GP, who has a broad spectrum of knowledge, but for something more serious, refers you to a specialist with in depth knowledge, ie a CONSULTANT.
Quite frankly, some of the comments and suggestions made would hardly meet the requirements of running a whelk stall let alone than a multi million pound organisation.Interesting quote from Neil Rogers in today’s Leader:-
“He and fellow members HAD donated their pay increase to charities in the Wrexham area and that he believed the majority of members would follow suit”At the risk of being cynical, this tends to indicate that acceptance of the pay rise was a done deal prior to the vote being taken by full Council and that Labour members are extremely philanthropic towards local good causes.
Or maybe there is a second interpretation, that there is some degree of prevarication in the statement made.
I treat with some degree of scepticism the statement that there was no alternative to accepting the increase recommended by the IRPW. The Review Body for the NHS made recommendations to Government regarding pay increases for NHS staff, but the Government refused to accept them and imposed their own settlement. Surely it is within the powers of the less than useless Welsh Assembly, or indeed Local Authorities to accept or reject RECOMMENDATIONS!!!!!!On this thread alone, WCBC have been accused of:-
1. Wasting resources so that it looks better on the books.
2. Gritting for the sake of it.
3. To prevent surplus monies being reallocated to Plas Madoc.
All based on supposition without one shred of evidence to support the assertions.And you still say that WCBC aren’t being accused of conspiring?
Insomuch as is stated ‘reflective of how………..past decisions’, the title of the thread is quite specific in its’ intent, ie Gritters Out, how is that reflective of past decisions?
Beats me, I’m afraid.This thread started off badly and then rapidly degenerated into one of the most ridiculous conspiracy theories that I have had the misfortune to read, ever.
I am sure that they rely on better information than the temperature read out in a car or information obtained from a (shall I say) unnamed weather forecasting source.
As AMA Express states “Damned if they do. Damned if they don’t”.Some of the talk on this thread almost refers to the people made, or being made redundant, as aliens or simply a number.
They are human beings and, like all of us, without exception, naturally will seek for the best settlement possible.
Put yourself in their shoes for a moment and ask yourself ‘if I can settle for more, why should I settle for less?’
And 99Dylan, you’ve hit the nail on the head when you say the ‘word on the ground is…’.
Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear and you won’t go far wrong.
Read too many ‘have heards’ on this site that have turned out to be pure fantasies in the end.@jimbow 12250 wrote:
It may well be that the persons doing the parachute jump are doing it off their own bat.They may well support other charities.It is their decision who they support.For goodness sake GET A LIFE
Club Director, Commercial Manager and others? Does that sound like ‘off their own bat’? Hmmmmm!
And your point is?
If you had taken the time to check, you would find that the average redundancy payment totals less than £12500. A paltry sum considering that many of those people are no longer in employment.
The single line comment you make is, I feel sure, designed to provoke rather than to make a valid point.
WCBC like any other employer is obliged to compensate employees when terminating employment (whether forced or otherwise).
The “Local Government (early termination of employment) (discretionary compensation) Regulations 2006 refer, and they state the payments that individuals are ENTITLED to.
As far as I am able to ascertain, WCBC have acted correctly and with propriety in this matter and criticism in this instance is unwarranted and frankly, malicious in intent.
