Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Busman747
Graham, I, like Margaret P. enjoy reading your points of view on the accyweb and should you ever decide to stop your input, it would make the accyweb that much poorer.......HOWEVER! You say: "But nothing gets learnt from people who have a closed mind, fixed agenda and who cant handle others opinion."
This is certainly true but bear in mind that YOU have made sweeping statements about the politics of Accywebbers in general! It is your privilege as an individual to argue on-line with another member...but to paint all and sundry with the same brush is sure to antagonise.
|
I also said that I am not always right. Your right, sweeping statements are dangerous territory when used in the absolute.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Busman747
[b][color=blue]I totally agree with Staggeringman in that the Panopticon should not be put on the coppice nor anywhere else. You say: "Its not local money. Its outside money" and that is my argument!
I care not for your politics, you are outside my influence BUT I detest quango's that spend £millions of pounds throughout the country (and YES, it IS our money!) and pocket vast fortunes into their own pockets for doing so. Quango's are made up of wealthy egotistical prats that are urged to find reasons to squander vast sums of money on useless projects and try to convince locals that they are SO lucky to have this project thrust upon them!
|
Outside money local money, still tax payers money. I am not saying your wrong but your perspective implies no difference. tax payer loses. however hyndburns fortunes will vary. our money will get spent, just somewhere else. Quangos are a Tory Tony thing. Maggie loved em... keeps the Labour Town Hall fiefdoms at bay. Tony loves em...keeps the Labour Town Hall fiefdoms at bay. Locally Nigel Rix loved em... keeps the Labour Town Hall fiefdoms at bay and Tories love em [cept PB] ...keeps the Labour Town Hall fiefdoms at bay. Next quango to appear, stock transfer...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Busman747
You also say: "We knocked on 4000 voters doors and the Panopiticons never came up once. Most strange if you read Accy Web!!!!".....not strange at all considering the ratio of Accywebbers to the population of Hyndburn, and perhaps the population in general are more worried about loutish behaviour, lack of medical treatment on the N.H.S, and other general issues. Just because the Panopticon is not on their "crucial" worry list, It does not automatically give it the "green light"
|
Your right. Thats why the public meetings were important in gauging opinion.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Busman747
One more comment from you, : "However what is there now is spolit by a grafiti covered shelter and worn monument, all accessed by ad hoc paths which are eroding the site. Some of the early schemes would have removed that shelter."
Can YOU or anyone else guarantee that finance will be found for the upkeep and security of the Panopticon? Of course not! What ever is put there will be ruined within just a few years. THIS is why locals (and most accy webbers) object to our money being spent!
|
I am tempted to favour No. No upkeep money beyond a small allocation in the funding. Two things come from that. If you run away from everything thats looks a problem, you'll get nowhere. Thats one danger sign. Secondly if it gets status, then it should receive, be able to more easily get funding eg Nature Reserve. In life hard work and a willingness to progress is the gateway to success.