Matt
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
[quote quote=147801]What the hell are you on about Matt mate?
Don’t be shy.[/quote]The person posting anonymously is telling me not to be shy? Someone filled your thing out like it was a quiz from a teen magazine. The rest was just referring to something that happened late last year – topical.
[quote quote=147798]
So let me play this…you are either
1 Drunk. Don’t drink to excess
2 Stoned. Don’t take drugs either
3 High on Spice. Does black pepper count?
4 Foreign. Born and raised here
5 Exchanging your goods in the many pawn shops. Never been in one
6 Eating a Greggs as you type. Think I have used this shop twice
7 Partially sighted. Normal vision
8 Young and naïve and think this is the norm for a town. Pmsl I wish!
7 Drunk..oops done that one. Groundhog Day?
8 Stuck in traffic lights on every road that is being dug up once again. Groundhog Day 2? Gas pipes need replacing …c’est la vie!
9 Stuck in the A&E department with nothing better to do than think wow what a good town. Only ever been there twice
10 Dodging potholes on every single bloody road into this dump of an excuse for a town. This is my new hobby!
11 Are you 12? I was once …….
12 perhaps you cant find the exit sign out of the idiotic waste of money of the arts hub? I found my way in and out with no navigational aids at all.I do love a quiz![/quote]
Excerpt from Wrexham Teen Whinge Weekly – circulation 87 – Oct 2017 – now defunct
Next week’s quiz – What Type of Brymbo Village Yob are you? A Saturday Night Time Passing Dispersal Order Special
Sneak preview:
1) Are you?
a) Not from this area
b) Definitely not from this area
c) From beyond the border of Brymbo
d) Foreigner
e) Traveller[quote quote=147637]Councillor Bithell’s viewpoints lead me to have two extra thoughts on the issue of littering to those initially made when I started this thread
(1) What has happened to democracy in Wrexham? The problems around Kingdom and littering policy evidence the viewpoint that the council is over-influenced and managed by a cabal of unrepresentative councillors in an executive. The transparency of becoming an executive member is lacking, and it seems that the majority of elected members can do little to either challenge the executive’s policies. They are unable or unwilling to remove an executive member with whom they seriously disagree. The full council of elected members could change this undemocratic model of local government but so far not had the will to do so.
(2) Since the beginning of public policing in the early 19th century the principle of policing in England and Wales was policing by consent of the public. Failing to keep to this traditional principle undermines policing as it will cause conflicts between it and the public; additionally, the police will not receive the public’s support. As we move towards ‘private policing’ it is worth bearing in mind our traditional policing principles. We could head toward a different policing model, such as on continental Europe, where policing is imposed on the public by the power of the state. However, if we wish to change policing by consent, I argue that more significant discussion and thought is needed than accepting the current dictates of Cllr Bithell.[/quote]
Two very excellent points here.
1) In regards to Council Democracy – I think the whole reason is a lack of understanding by the general public (and quite frankly other councillors) of how the independent set-up works in Wrexham. Nobody knows who they are getting from these independent groupings – are they even any different any more? Or are they just 1 super-independent majority grouping, which therefore makes them by very nature the opposite of being independent, they are very much attached and very much the establishment. We’re falling into a Democratic People’s Republic of Korea situation where the actual substance of the political make-up doesn’t do what it says on the tin. If we entertain the idea that they are in fact 2 separate independent groupings, neither of them stand on any manifestos (like the other political parties do) so the actual coherency and direction of decisions made has no marker stick (pre-election pledges) to actual measure their performance or actions by.
Plus what role do the Tories have in the whole thing. We know about the open Tories in the exec make-up. However, if every single independent was forced to show their hand (no-one is asking them to) and reveal their actual political colours (whether supporting or voting) it would be interesting to see how many of them were actual Tories. We have some who are confirmed Tories, as they stood on a failed voter platform for them in the past and then gained success by adopting the kayfabe of an Independent. They will still very much be operating with a conservative mindset – in cahoots with the Tories. You’d have to rule out any of the independents being secret Labour as it would make more sense to club together with the rest of the actual Labour and attempt to secure a council majority. Likewise, Plaid and Green both wear their hearts on their sleeve and would only campaign transparently to further their brands.
This leaves stealth Lib Dems (political wilderness) and UKIP (are they still even active?) or this is an amusing one, a councillor who is apolitical and doesn’t vote for any parties. The reality is, if someone turned round and revealed Wrexham was actually being ran by a Tory council there’d be outrage and an active campaign to oust them, but there’s a massive inertia and apathy about the entire local political scene, with people underwhelmed by the lacklustre local Labour representation – none of them actually seem to engage with the people locally, or have any strong outgoing views on either the Welsh or British political scene.
But yes, the apparent overstrength of the combined 2 independent groupings means that they can get away with most unfavourable actions and can maintain the unfair nature of how the Executive Board works. The actual opposition to any plans is heavily relied on groundswell support from the general public who are forced to club together into action groups – e.g. North Wales against Kingdom, Save Plas Madoc, Groves Heritage etc… in order to get anything done. There is an overlap between individuals in the different groups, but once they have their goal achieved their passion and enthusiasm for other local issues and activism just dwindles. With this whole political impasse in place, unless we can get some kind of resurgence from any direction – the same faces are going to maintain control for years to come until they retire.
2) In terms of the policing issue private vs public – I think we can categorically say that policing for profit would be the very worst and most corrupt form of law enforcement that could ever happen. If policing becomes monetised either against number of arrests made or for reduction in crime numbers that would always be gamed in the interests of mining profits both by individuals and the establishment. You only need to look at the behavioural incentive driven economics of how Kingdom operate – their remit was originally to get the levels of dog fouling down as well as reduce overall litter and untidyness to the county.
Now you look at what they are “enforcing” they’ve identified the single most easiest target and maximum revenue generating scheme – smokers dropping butts in the most populous areas of town. They are ignoring almost all other littering and dog fouling crimes and using the excuse that they have driven through other less busy parts of town as a tick-off that they are enforcing things in those areas. It’s a well known fact that they usually patrol all the main supermarket (where they’re not banned) and other car parks around town – there are spotters in place.
Now that is not them carrying out their particular “policing” activities properly whatsoever. It’s the equivalent of a hypothetical private police force only making arrests for petty crimes committed on CCTV (say they were paid £250 per successful conviction) but ignoring more serious crimes that required gathering of witness and forensic evidence, such as murders and armed robberies then turning round as they were not generating enough profit then them saying Crime’s down in the town centre look at our arrest/conviction records – meanwhile it becomes like Mad Max out in the sticks.
I think the police themselves reject the very nature and approach of Kingdom doing enforcement, seeing as they’ve effectively said that they won’t respond to Kingdom’s requests to assist them where an “offender” refuses to cooperate. This very statement out in the public domain – as said by council officials means that Kingdom’s actual enforcement powers have been declared null and void. If they cannot actually criminalise someone who refuses to cooperate when challenged but are then taking money out of people scared into paying up – especially with lies about the police actually coming, then they are committing extortion and are nothing worse than a gang. Bithell may as well have hired some Hell’s Angels to enforce town littering as the end effect would have been the same.
My major concern now is that Kingdom are losing contracts in other areas in North Wales and if this is the case and Wrexham retains them under contract then more of the Kingdom Enforcement parasites who can no longer operate in other areas are going to descend onto Wrexham like locusts and increase “enforcement” activity and create more misery and deterrent to people wanting to come into the town centre. There are no bullyboys harassing shoppers at Broughton or Cheshire Oaks and parking is free in those 2 locations as well. Even if WCBC tweaks the contract rules with Kingdom, they are still going to seek ways to maximise profit (and commissions from the public) so the shift of harassment of those smoking will end up with them relentlessly pursuing a new target group – e.g. dog walkers. Can you imagine how unrelaxing that would be? Someone walking their dog, with a Kingdom thug waiting for the dog to do its business and then swooping the second it hits the floor before you get a chance to bag it.
The very nature of that is no longer policing and enforcement and actually falls into the realms of harassment and stalking. We’re falling into the territory of pre-crime here – Minority Report style. And you know how this works again from already observed targeting from Kingdom those with Staffies, Alsatians, Dobermans etc.. there’ll be almost 0 fines but the number of fines against little old ladies with Yorkshire Terriers, Chihuahuas and other lap dogs will be through the roof.
I could run through any littering and public nuisance scenario in the interests of profit and you’d see exactly how the situation could get skewed. It doesn’t work, this type of enforcement needs to be brought back in house into Wrexham Council and carried out not in the interest of profit generation, but in the interests of education of bad actions and the overall cleaning up of this county.
I’m glad someone brought this up, alongside the ridiculous measures to force kids to eat outside when spring still hasn’t emerged & if you read into the language over the canteen arrangements it sounds like they want to force kids to eat as fast as possible.
But yes the whole boys/girls segregation thing makes no sense whatsoever in 2018. Fact is both genders will have more incentive to mess about if split up. Can’t speak for the girls but I remember the ridiculous lunchtime antics back in the day if it was lads only.
If the school is too full, actually spend the money on adequate dining provision for the number of pupils there. If a similar situation were to arise in HMP Berwyn down the roads & lags were complaining about being forced to eat either outside in the rain or in an overcrowded canteen, you’d guarantee we’d never hear the end of it. But no, it’s completely acceptable to treat children either like wayward mountain sheep or battery hens – no choice in between.
It’s all over the top nanny state anyway, we used to be allowed out at lunch, which cleared out loads of people off school premises during lunch thus causing less of a dinner scrum.
Apparently these days 14+ are allowed to stay out until all hours without supervision once they’re home, but they are in grave danger of being ran over, mugged etc… if they leave school gates during the daytime.
What a world we live in.
Good article on the RAC about zip merge
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/driving-advice/zip-merging/However, you can guarantee that the reaction of queuing drivers of anyone perceived to be “pushing in” will be – “what’s this bloody joker doing?” Or the car based discrimination we all love to do “typical Audi/Beemer/Merc/4×4 w****r”.
The very audacity that might break the British notion of the civic duty of queuing, that someone might reach town 10 seconds before you even though they haven’t paid their queue dues will cause driver’s heads to explode.
Which is why when you yourself get caught in the wrong lane or stuck at a junction when it’s busy & several hard nosed drivers have not granted you access, you think the person who’s let you in is the bloody messiah. Then if a BMW driver lets you in you feel shock almost like it’s some kind of trick and that you actually have to go and tell someone as soon as you get home.
[quote quote=147465]Judging by the inane comments from Cllr. Bithell recently and unfortunately, over the longer term, is he fast becoming the local version of Boris Johnson?[/quote]
Wrexham suffers from too many career politicians and their dim view is that they are incapable of admitting mistakes or changing policies that actually cause harm and distress to many local people. Any genuine challenge to what is going on either from opposition councillors, the press or the general public is viewed as something to be dismissed until people get bored of it and it goes away. It does very much mirror the likes of Boris Johnson et al in the current shower that is our British Government.
Only when sufficient public outrage is expressed and they are effectively forced into a corner do they yield, but this is a massive bulldozer method. Public resistance over Plas Madoc demolition caused large numbers of councillors to quit the Labour Party. Public resistance to the demolition of the Groves caused the Council to P*ss vaste swathes of rate-payer’s money up the wall in Court costs and now they will let the building rot and not allow it to be put to educational use because they didn’t get their own way.
We are very much still in the old school way of thinking in terms of councillors. They are stuck back 20 years ago when councillors did and said and the public took what was going on as the best option for them – they asked that no public interest was taken in their actions and that enough people would vote them back in once every few years.
With hyperlocal news and social media these dinosaur-type councillors view the ever-increasing public scrutiny as a nuisance and a hindrance to the actual doing of “council business”. This quite simply has to change.
I read an article the other day where someone has predicted (could be wrong) that Labour will sweep the council elections in London because they are bringing in idealistic, listening to the people style fresh politicians. Ones that engage on the doorstep, are not afraid to challenge the status quo and actually try and make a difference to people’s lives rather than dictate to them that it is important to have a “conservative” mindset and accept that we all have to deal with austerity. Now whether or not they will actually deliver on these promises is a completely different matter, but there is a suggestion that previously affluent Tory safe councils like Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea etc… where it was assumed that the local Tory candidates could sit pretty rather than go round on the doorsteps to drum up support, could well turn red. The gravy train is over. The demand for active and idealistic go-getter councillors, rather than wealthy pillar of the community, status quo, bureaucratic by the book councillors is coming to pass. Don’t get me wrong, the councillors of this profile type could be from any party, it’s just at the moment London is having somewhat of a Labour love-in and they are making all the right moves at grass-roots level.
The general rule is that London is about 20 years ahead of the curve when it comes to political trends and then it filters out into the rest of the country – Wrexham being affected more by North West England than South Wales will definitely be affected.
You only need to look at the councillors in Wrexham who people make the most positive noise for and are very much in a minority. You’ve got Clrs Jones and Harper of Plaid & as much as I may not agree with his viewpoints or ideology, Clr Atkinson does work hard for the people. We will have to wait a few more local elections before a configuration of decent and perceived competent councillors become a majority rather than a minority and we can see an executive board that has a genuine vested interest in listening to the people of Wrexham.
How this ties in with Kingdom is that it is one of those bad decisions for Wrexham that will be very difficult to reverse until enough groundswell forces the council’s hand.
[quote quote=147466]
What happened to the two electric cars the Council bought sometime ago ?
[/quote]
[quote quote=147414]The main reason Anglesey council removed Kingdom was due to the sheer number of complaints by the local residents.[/quote]
If only the current Wrexham Councillor set-up took local resident complaints seriously. Anyone who disagrees with how things are currently done in the town/county are in the wrong and are part of some kind of problem, rather than people to work with and help generate decent solutions that work for most.
Of course when you get elected in on 30% turnouts, as long as at least 15% of your total ward agrees with you and actually bothers to vote then it doesn’t matter who else you alienate or annoy across the entire Wrexham populous. Sweeten the deal with new facilities in the ward conveniently on election year, bish bash bosh.
Anyway back to the main point.
The actual intelligent way for hurt Kingdom would be to hurt them in the pocket by people STOPPING DROPPING FAG ENDS. Just imagine that revenue stream drying up, they’d have to work really hard to find anyone else intentionally littering. Who do they go next for an easy target? People spitting gum out?
The problem is that smokers who actually just lob their fag ends on the floor (I’m sure the vast majority of smokers don’t these days) are not particularly sensitive to rule following or intelligent collective action to deal with scourges on society, such as Kingdom. I’m not going to get into any discussion about whether or not smoking is bad – that’s a personal individual’s decision on their own health. It’s like the same mindsets of drivers who speed recklessly in areas where the signs come up that signify that there’s either going to be a fixed or chance of a mobile speed camera and then they get caught speeding despite being warned. Likewise, the reckless fag end droppers get fined just aren’t helping themselves or anyone else either. Instead of thinking hang on a minute and warning their mates to be careful, they just get angry and claim innocence, even though they know what they did wrong.
From a personal POV I don’t like Kingdom because I don’t think a private for-profit business group should have the rights and powers to go round intimidating members of the public, especially when the net outcome is a pittance back into the public coffers and a hefty wad of cash into the profits of that private company. In my mind, that’s extortion. We have established that they don’t go along with recommended DEFRA guidelines, which is give the person the opportunity to pick up the litter – this guideline makes sense as it offers an education angle to litter dropping, making people think twice about dropping litter, rather than right it’s an instant fine zero tolerance, which puts Kingdom officers at complete odds with the general public.
Also, they are not actually helping to improve the overall litter issues in the areas they operate in, so it’s a complete farce.
Someone has tweeted to @Wrexham about the fact that even though they try to get the police involved if someone refuses to give an address, the police don’t want to get involved as it’s not a police matter. If this is the case then this is bordering on racketeering. The only thing I can suggest to people beyond not actually dropping fag ends etc… is mass civil disobedience and refusing to let them know who you are. Obviously easier said than done if some burly intimidating blokes come up to you, it’s going to work on the vast majority of people who might be concerned for their own well-being from their behaviour or belief of a trumped up level of authority. It would be very interesting to know what % ratio of fines collected are from easy targets, rather than people who are more likely to basically tell them to f*ck off. Would be interesting to get hold of their training manuals. Are they actively profiling certain types of people (e.g. oaps, women on their own, young people etc…) to try and get fines out of? A demographic breakdown could well prove some level of active discrimination. It’s already been noted that they generally do not target groups of lads/groups of men who are actively littering right in front of their face.
[quote quote=147318]It’s a shambles, you are being optimistic even with giving it 6 weeks. It was empty at lunch time today. It is a total embarrassment to the town.[/quote]
Everyone who says let’s get behind this project, stop being negative in various outlets online – should actually give us a tally of how many times they have visited Ty Pawb since it opened and how much money roughly they’ve spent there – as platitudes are going to do nothing for ongoing trade in there.
The only other thing I have observed so far is people taking photos of Plat Bach food and I swear it’s always the same dishes. People are soon going to get bored of doing that after going once. Everyone loved that fish shop in town across from KFC that’s now got Everland in it, until they didn’t and it ceased trading.
It has to be said on this occasion fair play that they have decided to actually listen to the public for once and followed through on something.
In my mind though the entire situation could have been avoided had they not messed about with disabled parking. That was what got the public’s goat. So if they’d have had the foresight to leave that alone then I very much doubt the average person on the street would have given 2 hoots about free parking for council workers – it had been going on for years and nobody had raised an eyebrow. So it’s just one of those things. Ultimately charging all users for council-owned parking has earmarked additional revenue generations to go into the public coffers, so let’s hope it all goes to good use.
There has to be a town ecosystem that works for everyone or it becomes a big fight over who is entitled to what.
