Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 944502)

I don't know who was involved in the discussions but Clare Pritchard was involved at some stage.

On the subject of the Enquiries address, it's a far from being fobbed off as you can get and indeed the councillors themselves use it because it is the best way of logging and following up any complaint. You get a log number and a reply within the hour to tell you where your query has been directed and a guarantee of a reply from a council officer within 7-10 working days. I would always advocate that as the best point of contact for a source of cast iron answers to any problem.

There's really no getting out of it from a council point of view, you MUST be given an answer.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 937122)

Clare Pritchard is responsible for all town centres in the borough but this decision cannot be levelled at her entirely.

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 944498)

Yeh mean like you used to do wi the observor?:D on there behalf of course.

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 944513)

So Cllr. Clare Pritchard is the person most likely to have been involved with this decision, and therefore presumably in a position to authorise their return, and maybe even give a date when they'll be brought back, rather than at some unspecified date in the future?

Thank you.

At last!

It would have been so much easier if you'd named this person much earlier.

Better late than never.

She could have even told us this herself.

Seeing as she was online yesterday...reading this thread.

Cheers.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 944502)

I don't know who was involved in the discussions but Clare Pritchard was involved at some stage.

On the subject of the Enquiries address, it's a far from being fobbed off as you can get and indeed the councillors themselves use it because it is the best way of logging and following up any complaint. You get a log number and a reply within the hour to tell you where your query has been directed and a guarantee of a reply from a council officer within 7-10 working days. I would always advocate that as the best point of contact for a source of cast iron answers to any problem.

There's really no getting out of it from a council point of view, you MUST be given an answer.

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 944517)

Whilst i see that the drunks were a problem, to me this was a case of "Using a Sledgehammer" to crack a walnut,cos everyone suffers! whilst yeh say it was of no use arresting em,cos they were glad of a meal, perhaps a better way would be to not arrest em, but implement a system that gives em a spot fine. then this system would allow fer the fine to be deducted from there benefits, result- this i'm sure would have more effect on these people, n only the guilty suffer, this i am 100% certain will never happen cos the dogooders will trot out reasons why this aint fair,:(

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 944515)

I said this on 1st October, over a month ago.

Reading it again I still feel it implies rather heavily which councillor was involved in the discussion process.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 944523)

What do you mean Clare Pritchard was involved at some stage, she SHOULD have been involved at every stage and made the final decision, or is this another thing that's been delegated

Originally Posted by MargaretR (Post 944524)

One solution is to provide far more benches and for the police to move the drunks to the ones furthest away from the stalls.

Then everybody gets a chance to sit and the nuisance drunks will be segregated from the civilised population.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 944525)

An excellent suggestion Cashy and I will put it to the Town Centre Regeneration panel.

Not to put a downer on it but I am led to believe that many of those who are causing the problem are vagrants of no fixed abode (or 'tramps' as we used to be able to call them in days gone by). Spot fines are useless because such people have no money to give and it costs more to process the wretched paperwork than would ever be recovered. Very frustrating.

The regrettable obvious answer would be for people to stop giving them money but it's a rather heartless thing to try and suggest to the public at large as a solution and certainly not something I would advocate.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 944528)

John, don't twist my words mate, I wasn't there. I'm fairly certain this was not one person's decision, it is far more likely to have been a committee decision or something agreed by consensus during discussion with various people.

Like I said, send an email to the Enquiries address and you will get an immaculate response detailing all the facts you request without any political spin on it whatsoever.

I really can't be any more open than that.