bubble
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
In all honesty, it doesn’t actually surprise me that a Wrexham councillor has no knowledge of the PSPOs in Wrexham, as I don’t rate our councillors as being anything even approaching competent. But we get what we vote for, or at most, the best of a bad bunch. I wonder whether, if our candidates for councillor had to go through a normal application process with interview, etc, rather than through polling, would they possess appropriate qualifications and/or experience deemed necessary for the job.
However, if he was NOT a councillor and instead a member of the public, I would fully understand his failure to realise there are any PSPOs in Wrexham. It’s very easy not to notice.[quote quote=139476]
I don’t have a problem with the council spending taxes on providing free parking for people with cars, but only if they match the funds they use with funds spent on public transport. People who don’t have a car should not have to help subsidise those who do.
Bubble, I think you misunderstand the debate. Taxes are not being spent to provide free parking. The car parks actually make a profit and that money goes into council coffers to pay towards other services. My point at the meeting was to freeze car park charges as any increases would deter people from visiting the town to shop or whatever. Also rather than take away the existing free parking during certain hours (which was the proposal), I wanted to see more free parking targeted at Local residents to spend more time in town. The car parks would still make a profit and the Council could use that money as it does now to go towards its budgets. The subject will now go to public consultation, and everybody will have an opportunity to have their say.
Providing free parking in a council run car park would still deprive the council of revenue, however small that amount might be, and it is all of us – not just car owners – who bear that cost. So if we’re talking in technicalities, perhaps the amount of revenue LOST by the council in providing x amounts of hours free parking to car owners could be matched by the same amount being spent on public transport for those who do not have cars. Just because the council owns the car park and makes a profit in parking charges does not mean this only affects people with cars – why should the council provide free parking for car owners without also helping those who rely on public transport.
Bubble, the council already provides free parking at certain times, the proposal is to remove that free time. My point was to keep the free periods. So there is no loss of current revenue as there is no charge for these hours at present. The car parks do not use tax payers money. They generate enough income to pay for themselves with some profit which is returned to the council. The council uses that money to pay towards other services.
As you say in a different post, you think the town is a dump, well perhaps if we can encourage more people to travel to town, maybe the shops will thrive and the town may improve. Regarding a subsidy to public transport, there is nothing to stop you speaking to your own elected representative and ask them to look into it. But it is a totally different arguement. The council makes a profit from cars using the town, they do not make anything from people who travel by bus or train. The bus or train companies make the profit.
By the way, I do not have a problem with subsidised public transport. I believe that Central Government should be involved in this. However, that is a different topic and this discussion was about car parking charges.[/quote]
Well, that’s me told.
If I thought speaking to my elected representative would make any difference, then I would speak to them. Perhaps the town only looks like a dump to those of us who regularly have need to pass through the bus station and surrounding area. I’ll keep on catching the bus to Chester, I think – at least it’s regular and I don’t feel like a second class citizen simply because I don’t have a car.
It really annoys me that Mike Davies is quoted as saying “I think it would be great to see a scheme where local tax payers could have free parking for two or three hours a week”, as if only [and all] car drivers are taxpayers. I’m willing to bet that Mike has a car and possibly overlooked those of us who don’t.
I also think it right that the council’s car parks should be used to make a profit, or else as assets they should just be sold off. But if the council wants to extend a welcoming free parking period to its car driving ‘taxpayers’, it should also be considering an equivalent gesture to those who don’t even have a regular bus service.
Perhaps car drivers are just more equal than other Wrexham residents.
But as has also been stated on this thread, Wrexham is a dump. When I moved here I foolishly ignored warnings that Wrexham is grim. One guy actually told me that Wrexham should be tarmacked over and turned into a car park for Chester.
[quote quote=139456]
I don’t have a problem with the council spending taxes on providing free parking for people with cars, but only if they match the funds they use with funds spent on public transport. People who don’t have a car should not have to help subsidise those who do.
Bubble, I think you misunderstand the debate. Taxes are not being spent to provide free parking. The car parks actually make a profit and that money goes into council coffers to pay towards other services. My point at the meeting was to freeze car park charges as any increases would deter people from visiting the town to shop or whatever. Also rather than take away the existing free parking during certain hours (which was the proposal), I wanted to see more free parking targeted at Local residents to spend more time in town. The car parks would still make a profit and the Council could use that money as it does now to go towards its budgets. The subject will now go to public consultation, and everybody will have an opportunity to have their say.[/quote]
Providing free parking in a council run car park would still deprive the council of revenue, however small that amount might be, and it is all of us – not just car owners – who bear that cost. So if we’re talking in technicalities, perhaps the amount of revenue LOST by the council in providing x amounts of hours free parking to car owners could be matched by the same amount being spent on public transport for those who do not have cars. Just because the council owns the car park and makes a profit in parking charges does not mean this only affects people with cars – why should the council provide free parking for car owners without also helping those who rely on public transport.
I don’t have a problem with the council spending taxes on providing free parking for people with cars, but only if they match the funds they use with funds spent on public transport. People who don’t have a car should not have to help subsidise those who do.
[quote quote=139252]Yes in reply to Jane, I would NEVER ring the police again to report anything. First thing they do is ask for your address and make a visit. That’s when the s**t hits the fan. Trying to do good only makes it hard for yourself. If they just corresponded by phone and checked on what has been reported I’m sure things wouldn’t get out of hand.
[/quote]
I think there is a tacit policy on the part of the police that if they fail to take ASB reports seriously then eventually people will realise there is no point in complaining and so won’t bother to call them. Then when something bad happens the police claim they couldn’t do anything because no one told them what was going on.I will not report to the police if I hear my neighbour being beaten up by her partner again as I think doing so endangers me and my home. So the police’s tactlessness may have implications for my neighbour too.
[quote quote=139094]Did you report them. If only everyone would report incidents Police and Council only react to statistics.
[/quote]
I wish it were that simple. I’m with Rondetto on this – you cannot trust the police to have any discretion. I called police once & specifically asked them not to come to my flat but to my neighbour’s where the [violent] problem was; I did not want my neighbour to know who had reported them. 10 mins later police arrived at my door, insisted on coming in (I thought I should play along in case they were visiting all neighbours), and it soon became apparent that they thought mine was the flat the complaint was about. I explained and they set off for the neighbour’s flat – one of the officers saying loudly in the stairwell “thanks for calling us”. Another time I called in anti-social behaviour of youths. Police visited youths several times but did not actually do anything. Later, after midnight, youths racially abused a lone woman so I reported that. Police took absolutely no action on the racial abuse so I made an official complaint. First they claimed they hadn’t been able to come out because I had been unable to describe the victim, then they claimed it had been a busy night for them, what with it having been a Friday – I had to point out it had been a Thu night / Fri morning. Their ultimate reason for failing to respond to my call about racial abuse was because they linked it to the less serious problem of the anti-social behaviour I had called about earlier. The lesson here, for me at least, has been that I should not report anti-social behaviour to the police because it is not taken seriously by the police and it results in either your identity being revealed or in anything else you report to them to be dismissed as unimportant.If I believed that they would not return, I’d personally be willing to stump up the money for some train tickets for these individuals.
[quote quote=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.
[/quote]
But authorities have also said that they don’t want to ‘criminalise’ the criminals, sorry I mean drug addicts, by arresting them.
[quote quote=138912] Even if you try and concentrate sending all the so-called ‘undesirables’ to one place, like what has happened in Rhyl, then there gets a point where a place can’t handle it or it gets so bad an overflow occurs. As we’ve seen, some of the Rhyl homeless and persistent drug abusers have decided to come to Wrexham.
[/quote]Makes me chuckle now to remember that when I were a lass our annual Sunday school outing was ALWAYS to Rhyl – I’m now wondering where they go these days. I bet it’s not Rhyl, and not only because it’s no funfair anymore.
