Matt
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Supermarkets are about convenience – not everyone does a daily commute or wants to do their shopping on their way home from work. I’m not sure sustainability was the accurate representation in the language they used of what as anyone with a car can shop anywhere. It’s more to do with supply and demand with the demand being there for an Aldi in Llay.
They are that in demand that average house prices near to an Aldi actually increase.
In primary schools at least, they are put into bubbles of single classes where no social distancing is required whatsoever indoors or outdoors within those bubbles.
This is because rightly so a number of child and educational experts people pointed out – it would be absolutely impossible to enforce children of a young age to socially distance at all times and stay away from their friends.
It might work in other countries where they teach authoritarian behaviours from a young age (like in Asia), but in the UK there’d literally be no teaching as adults responsible would just have to spend entire day shouting and getting children to keep apart. There also isn’t enough room in UK primary classrooms to keep everyone 2m apart at all times.
The way they are doing it is the only way they could have got the schools open, but it is still problematic when a case is confirmed in a classroom as it means 30 children and a number of staff then have to self isolate for 2 weeks. Then there’s a greater risk of spread because bizarrely siblings in other classes or other schools who have a brother or sister who has been required to self isolate are not required to do so and can continue in school despite living in the same house.
Everything everyone has said is true about children not really being symptomatic but can easily spread the illness if not careful to older family members or vulnerable. So it is of high level of concern the number of schools where outbreaks are popping up at the moment across Wrexham.
Well, you only need to look at the cases rising locally and in Wales to realise that the complete lack of courtesy of widespread mask avoidance in your observed instances last night goes to show why numbers are rising and why we are going to end up with tougher restrictions and for longer.
It is plainly obvious that when the firebreak was over, people treated it as they could do as they please – especially based on the worrying sharp increase over the weekend alone. Perhaps people think that with a vaccine in sight it’s less important to obey the rules as something will come and “fix” the situation, but it won’t be the case for those who die in vulnerable situations before they are able to be vaccinated and with the caveat that it works with no issues.
So far, the vast majority of people I’ve seen do wear masks, but I make a point of avoiding most town centre businesses (especially during peak times) and have a tendency to go to less busy rural locations. So I cannot confidently comment on what things are currently like in town when it gets busy.
The fact of the matter is Terry having an informal chat to his mates down the pub is perfectly entitled like the rest of us to make the comments he did – it’s a free world.
Unfortunately when he is being Clr Evans, a public servant elected by the good people of Chirk to represent all from the lowest of the low to the high and mighty and in his higher paying position of office on the Exec board as lead for the economy – the same comments are not acceptable.
It wasn’t that long ago that several councillors got sent for sensitivity training due to their poor choice of words regarding mental health, is this something that needs to repeated to educate them on other vulnerable members of the community?
Zinger, you are right – given the choice nobody wants to live next door to anyone they consider to be undesirable. It doesn’t even need to be a former criminal, homeless drug addict to trigger many a NIMBY – they might object to living next to a group of young individuals or perhaps even a family that is louder than they consider to be savoury or even someone with a barking dog or a crying baby.
The fact is everyone who needs to live in Wrexham needs to be housed somewhere and there’s no such thing as a street of good people or bad people – just a random set of people who have to decide individually whether or not they want to be neighbourly to each other or not – which is a two way street (no pun intended) – existing people being welcoming and in return new residents being social rather than anti-social.
Of course it goes without saying that the persistently intolerable and antisocial aren’t going to be welcome anywhere and they deserve no sympathy and have made a rod for their own back. However, it was a poor choice of words by Clr Evans to tarnish everyone with the same blackened brush, in fact going further and implying that anyone who receives any kind of housing benefits and isn’t paying their own rent (through employment or otherwise) is part of a bad bunch and will immediately be a bad tenant.
Private landlords, which includes some elected councillors in Wrexham actually receive an income for themselves potentially in some cases from housing benefit and the Universal Credit equivalent. Is it the case for them that they believe that their personal tenants in this situation are bad tenants? But are more than happy to take tax payer’s money rather than risk losing money by having an empty home not earning any income?
Lots of interesting information to pick over in this situation.
Reminds me of a very famous passage, very relevant for this time of year.
“At this festive season of the year, Mr. Scrooge,” said the gentleman, taking up a pen, “it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir.”
“Are there no prisons?” asked Scrooge.
“Plenty of prisons,” said the gentleman, laying down the pen again.
“And the Union workhouses?” demanded Scrooge. “Are they still in operation?”
“They are. Still,” returned the gentleman, “I wish I could say they were not.”
“The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?” said Scrooge.
“Both very busy, sir.”
“Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course,” said Scrooge. “I’m very glad to hear it.”
“Under the impression that they scarcely furnish Christian cheer of mind or body to the multitude,” returned the gentleman, “a few of us are endeavouring to raise a fund to buy the Poor some meat and drink, and means of warmth. We choose this time, because it is a time, of all others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices. What shall I put you down for?”
“Nothing!” Scrooge replied.
“You wish to be anonymous?”
“I wish to be left alone,” said Scrooge. “Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don’t make merry myself at Christmas and I can’t afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned–they cost enough; and those who are badly off must go there.”
“Many can’t go there; and many would rather die.”
“If they would rather die,” said Scrooge, “they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.
https://www.shmoop.com/christmas-carol/stave-1-full-text-5.html
You are right Jane, that is exactly what is going on and that someone put in the idea of siting a traveller site in a country park as a trojan horse that could deliberately be used later to torpedo the plans. As usual this political wrangling of those who rule over the executive has done down the town and makes them very much look like they are not competent enough to deal with something like the LDP. They are much more in their comfort zone trying to blag more electronic items for themselves like laptops to then create more busywork to pretend they are earning their keep in trivial meetings.
I am of course referencing to the style of tabloid journalism and not the format in which it is printed – I mean come on, the majority of news is online now, if we are splitting hairs.
You have to wonder why anecdotal evidence gathered much earlier in the year by a member of the opposition in Wales is carrying such weight in terms of a story in the Daily Post’s eyes. Oh yes, it’s a tabloid.
If there was such an outrage about an incident happening in July, why has it only just come to light now?
I’ve been critical of the health board before but the Maelor are doing everything they can to keep Covid infections under control. There must surely be some kind of protocol against moving patients spontaneously off wards where other patients have contracted Covid.
Surely like with test and trace they’d need to be tested negative to make sure they weren’t also carrying symptoms? As they’d be classed as having come into contact. Also, it’s not like they have special individual isolation bedrooms for every single patient in these cases.
Disgusted Tory voter was outraged when he discovered there were in fact other sick people on the ward where his dearly beloved was treated for being ill and decided to bang his fists on the table and write to his local MP.
I think you make some very decent points Jane and have highlighted how Wrexham council are doing their best to deal with such a problematic issue that we face in Wrexham and regularly come back to in the cold winter months when sleeping rough can be life threatening. I am guessing the policies mentioned are because the council are limited by the bounds of the law about who they can and cannot exempt for a room for the night.
I think the issue here is that there is the possible legal point of view that those suffering from addiction can suddenly make the decision to just quit taking drugs or to make the correct and logical decision that the rest of us make, which is warmth, shelter and food should come first before drugs.
The whole nature of addiction is that it’s an illness that can’t be treated by Dickensian rules where we begrudge them shelter if they continue to take drugs. The crime commissioner shares the view here that drug users shouldn’t be criminalised or penalised.
If these homeless, ex prisoners (wow talk about being at the bottom rung of life) had access to clean needles and state sanctioned drugs (goodbye money to drug dealer scum) then they’d get into accomodation and be fed then we could look at weaning them off drugs.
Let’s face it they’d have been given methadone or another substitute in prison and would have been able to cope better there. The support provided to them once they are out of prison is inadequate if their specific needs cannot be met due to outdated drug stigma and rules.
They cannot be expected to be given a stark choice of comforts of needing to dry out and get a bed or face the cold of the streets and a fix as they’ll take the comfort of drugs every time.
I appreciate that some people think drug users and especially prisoners (criminals) are beyond redemption and don’t care about them. But anyone who is concerned about homelessness in Wrexham, which seems to be most people, must accept that this toughest and least likeable group are part and parcel of the whole problem and must be treated with the unique set of requirements that they need.
Even if you don’t think they deserve the time, money or resources spent on them. Overall, if we can prevent them from committing crime to get money for drugs and eliminate the customer base for drug dealers then that makes the town centre and problem areas of the town safer for the rest of us.
I am guessing because the instance before it referenced secondary schools and colleges only. Then there was no explicit reference to Primary schools.
Like I said the Facebook parent mob take devil in the detail to the extreme. It developed to quite a lively shouting match yesterday with the school being accused of being liars and forced to provide proof of the guidance they had received.
Then it just descended into parent on parent bullying, baseless claims that only teachers were bringing Covid into schools and apparent fears of witch hunts against those exempt against wearing masks.
It might have been clear to yourself Benjamin and to anyone with a sensible common sense view that a head teacher request is to be followed. But sadly the public guided rules have to be so explicit that even the most pig headed can’t argue with them. That’s just the way it is at the moment. Sad, I know when it directly concerns the safety of others, including children in the local community.
There even had to be further sub clarification that the rules to parents wearing masks also applied to those picking their children up from the playgroup / childcare setting in the school as individuals did not consider that to be regular school. This is what has to be dealt with here – people really are not taking a common sense approach and are still looking for loopholes.
