Alunh
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The Estyn Reports factor in those attributes of the catchment that might impact negatively on the assessment. It would be pointless to draw conclusions about different schools without understanding those factors that make their outcomes variable. The reports will often look at the value added consideration rather than the absolute state of play.
To answer Zinger’s point. In theory the attributes that you point out shouldn’t influence the assessment but they invariably do. Sometimes it is the case that individual teachers, whole departments or a whole school cannot cope with some of the consequences of the “difficulties” that they face, even if those teachers could more than cope in a different environment.
Thanks for taking my remark in one context to help beef up a point you were trying to make Matt. You’re a very naughty boy.
I have no idea about the ins and outs of this issue and what exactly represents the “interest” of any Councillors. From the little I have read it seems clear that the economics of getting Social Houses built are more difficult for Councils to “encourage” in terms of getting built because the builders are financially driven. Hence whilst the UK figures for House Building have been reasonably buoyant of late, those for the so-called Social builds have been disappointing. Perhaps its easier for WCBC not to play King Canute on this subject.
What I did pick up on in some of the recent political mumblings is that some of the political parties were more parochial than others where house building was concerned and seemed inclined to oppose schemes of Building that might attract incomers to Wrexham (Commuters in particular). Not sure what the agenda on that front is but it would appear to be vital to ensure that whatever template the authority follows maximises on the number of houses built (subject to the logistics of the build being satisfactory)
I can’t quite work out the rationale behind a couple of the points that you are making Ioan, but perhaps I have missed something in the discussion.
When you mention “organizations” bringing zero financial benefit to the town’s economies and that the “income they make leaves the area instantly and they employ no local people” can’t be about Wrexham’s shops. Obviously, these are major employers of local people and provide immense value to the local population in terms of goods and services made available in the immediate vicinity.
You move on to the idea of events being organised across the country, in the big cities, etc and you mention that they don’t have any free parking but are successful. If your point is that free parking isn’t the issue but the offer, that just doesn’t stand scrutiny for a small town like Wrexham. It’s obviously the case that if a town or city can put on a big event (Bruce Springsteen in Concert, Everton vs Liverpool, etc) that Car Parking charges are neither here nor there. Demand for such an offer will trump the charges. Unfortunately, small towns can’t compete on the offer and have to entice the consumer. Free Parking is one method.
On the trade-off between the Rate Payer, and the Car Park payer, I take your point. I wouldn’t go down the road of making Car Parking free but I would make it more intelligent and put Access at the top of the priority list. For example…..I would charge all Car Parkers the top Rate in the morning before 10.00 because they are the work force. In turn, I would charge a relatively lower figure thereafter because they are the Shoppers and Tourists. Lastly, I would place charges within the town centre because I would open up the town centre and place charge meters therein
Some great points made.
It’s obvious that Car Parking charges put people off coming to Wrexham. The higher the charge, the more the people are put off. Sadly, the debate about charges, which as many argue is a no-brainer, has now been dwarfed by the even bigger idea of Accessibility. People want their attractions to be immediately accessible….and, in the case of shopping, many won’t walk more than a few measly feet to make a purchase. Hence Supermarkets and Out-of-Town developments. Put Accessibility hand in hand with free Car Parking and you have the optimal blend. Do the opposite and you’re toast.
Which leads me on to the idea of skin in the game. Matt (in a great set of observations) argued that “this of course is an absolute no brainer to most with any common sense because as we keep trying to hammer home INCREASED FOOTFALL equals increased economic turnover in town equals increased business viability and regeneration. Therefore, returning an increased level of business rates into Wrexham council’s coffers”. Now whilst I can see why he might argue this point, please bear in mind that WCBC get nothing directly from the Business Rates. Nothing. Indeed, generally, WCBC get nothing from the town’s Retail vibrancy whatsoever except for the now pittance derived from the Markets and Ty Pawb. The only thing that WCBC get from a full town is the satisfaction that their approach to its success is working.
The idea that the success of the town might persuade various Councillors to adopt Retail friendly policies is an interesting one. What if some Councillors simply didn’t give a stuff? Is that likely? I doubt it…..but what does strike me….and a former Council Leader confirmed it for me…..when it comes to a choice between having a punt at higher income to fund services set against the state of play of the Retail sector…..they would take the income every time. After all, many of them use that Income in their Villages or on pet projects. The presumption that such people make is that higher charges may see marginal drops in Car Park usage but such drops will be compensated for by the higher parking rates being paid in WCBC Car Parks.
I would ask the Councillors to collectively think again. They brought the Manchester Metropolitan University into Wrexham to attempt to revive the High Street. One of the top factor areas is Car Parking and Access. Think again
I have no problem with Ian sticking to his opinion. He’s not a delegate and our Parliamentary system has never clarified the precise relationship between an MP and his Constituents. The Politics buffs will argue that an MP is part delegate, part representative (of his party as well as all of his Constituents) and part deliberative……and Ian must be the one who decides which of these he is.
The post, however, is based upon the idea that he might lose his seat by being any of these. The decision he adopts at each stage is difficult…..and I don’t envy him. The party that he serves will almost invariably split on this issue and whilst the Conservatives are currently under acute pressure, Labour are next.
Ultimately, let’s hope that some statesmen/women rise out of this car crash and act in the national interest (whatever that is). The main thing is that these matters are resolved with as much civility as possible
[quote quote=173965]To those who say the decision was made at the referendum, would you say I would like to buy that house.. Don’t worry I will sign up even though I don’t know what the inside looks like.?[/quote]
That might be a good point…….except the people who voted have been inside that house for the last 40 years + and know precisely what it looks like. Additionally, they are mainly aware that next year some new rules are being introduced courtesy of the Lisbon treaty that will make their lives even more constrained
I actually liked your argument Matt. It was a cock up not thinking it through fully when it was set up……….but it was what it was……and should have been honoured. The Labour Party should have got their long trousers on, and given support (if only by abstaining) to get this done.
If you offer a binary choice with the winner takes it all……..
Wrexham Council were just wondering whether you might volunteer to move their goalposts into summer storage next year Matt. You seem to have an aptitude for it
I hope that I have misunderstood this report (which may well be likely).
It is obviously as dumb not to take grants without thinking the use of the same through as it is to take them, especially if the money will only find its way into some other community courtesy of the Welsh Assembly. Grants, per se, are not the problem.
The problem, of course, is when you let people loose on tax payer money who should never be let loose spending the contents of a money box. Take the wonderful state of the art (excuse the cliché) Theatre proposals, all complete with fancy grant. Money was made available for a new build subject to it being used for a criterion laced purpose. Sounded good to me. Until, of course, you delved into the detail. 400 seats proposed……making it 1100 seats smaller than Llandudno’s equivalent, 600 less that Rhyl’s Pavilion, 100 seats less than the Stiwt and 500 seats less than the William Aston Hall. In brief, a Theatre that broadly replicated the Little Theatre.
What this suggested is that the Theatre proponents, who were declaring that major artists would perform there (in their dreams) knew nothing about the economics of sustainability of this sort of project. The truth is that Grants can get things done…..but not if utilised by people who know absolutely nothing about making an objective work successfully
I was aware of that Jim. In fact, I filled in the survey form concerning the Markets.
The problem that I have when I hear that these Task & Finish groups are looking at the optimal way to develop the Markets is the level of expertise that they contain. Developing appropriate Retail strategies in a town like Wrexham for the Markets requires high level Marketeer skills and I really do hope that they have people on board in the group that understand the complex issues in play.
All decisions concerning the way forward for the Markets have to factor in the nature of the Wrexham consumer as it stands, the available consumers moving forward, the infra-structure available for usage, the budget potentially deployable and so on. Most of all, the Markets, both indoor and outdoor have been adversely affected by a one-size-fits-all approach to Rents in an age when something more subtle is required. After all, if a football team has to pay different wages to attract (say) a full back as opposed to (say) a striker, it may well be the case that Rents have to be tailored to need to gain variety of trader. Ultimately, it is the variety that will be important and whilst I am all in favour of having no Covenant, variety of stall is vital
