Council tree felling...

[atticus 95]

^^^^^^

Bang on the money.I wonder if all parties sat down they could work something like this out.

[paula4sheff 10]

One of the protestors was saying exactly the same on thr bbc- they want to sit down and have a discussion, and have repeatedly asked to apparently.

[Daven 10]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-42986609

Sheffield is made a laughing stock yet again.

It's emabarrassing:blush:

Edited February 8, 2018 by Daven

[paula4sheff 10]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-42986609

Sheffield is made a laughing stock yet again.

It's emabarrassing:blush:

 

You could also argue that it shows there are people in Sheffield willing to stand up and be counted when it comes to shady and dodgy practices- which shows the city in a good light, in some ways.

 

I agree though that it yet again presents SCC as a joke, but that's not a bad thing - the more exposure their refusal to tell us how our money has been spent gets the better.

 

"Campaigners were demanding to see details of the £2.2bn private finance initiative deal (PFI) between Sheffield City Council and Amey, the private contractor carrying out the work.

 

Chris Rust, who described the protest as peaceful, said: The council has refused to show us the contract and we wanted to make the public aware of that."

 

Roger Doonan added: "The protest has brought a lot of attention and the more attention that is brought to bear on a £2.2bn deal the better."

[WarPig 71]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-42986609

Sheffield is made a laughing stock yet again.

It's emabarrassing:blush:

 

The protest was embarrassing by the way it was conducted. I hope it isn't taken seriously by SCC or anyone else for that matter as it certainly wasn't conducted seriously. If anything, the protesters may even have lost any chance of support from the people who are neutral on the subject.

[paula4sheff 10]

The protest was embarrassing by the way it was conducted. I hope it isn't taken seriously by SCC or anyone else for that matter as it certainly wasn't conducted seriously. If anything, the protesters may even have lost any chance of support from the people who are neutral on the subject.

 

What makea you say that? It's highlighted the pfi issue- which seemed to be the aim?

[WarPig 71]

What makea you say that? It's highlighted the pfi issue- which seemed to be the aim?

 

Its highlighted it in the wrong way for the protesters. Not professional at all. Makes a mockery of a very serious topic.

[Longcol 592]

One of the protestors was saying exactly the same on thr bbc- they want to sit down and have a discussion, and have repeatedly asked to apparently.

 

If they want a discussion why do they always make demands?

 

The Rustlings Road petition back in 2015.

 

"We, the undersigned, refute the assertion that the felling of Lime (Tilia sp.) trees on Rustlings Road is necessary. Instead, we demand, and believe it imperative, that sensitive engineering solutions (1) be adopted and implemented to enable the long-term retention of these trees."

https://www.change.org/p/sheffield-city-council-streetsahead-sheffield-gov-uk-save-the-12-trees-on-rustlings-road-sheffield

 

No different in 2018.

 

"Campaigners were demanding to see details of the £2.2bn private finance initiative deal (PFI) between Sheffield City Council and Amey, the private contractor carrying out the work."

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-42986609

 

Having spent more years than I care to remember in jobs that required negotiation with local authorities and central government, "demands"don't sit squarely with "sit down and discuss".

[1978 14]

OK, enough of the bickering, point scoring time is over.

 

Here's the deal. By next Friday, 16th February, Amey/Sheffield City Council provide a list of all the remaining trees due to be felled. That number is understood to be about 250 but will be more or less. That figure is divided by 2 to determine the target with about 125 to go and 125 guaranteed survival. Both sides must then decide their priority trees to remove or preserve.

 

By Friday 2nd March both sides will have decided which 125 trees they're most determined to save, or determined to fell. If a list is not provided by the council side all trees stay. If no list from the preservationists all trees go. No lists means Sheffield is condemned to continuing this dispute to eternity.

 

Where there's agreement between both sides those trees go or are preserved, at least the fate of 125 would be confirmed. The worst case would be a maximum of 125 trees which both sides considered priority to either fell or preserve, the hard core.

 

The fate of those few remaining trees then to be determined by a secret ballot of registered voters in the roads concerned to decide the final priority as to which are kept or go.

 

Summarising, 250 apparently left. Let's agree to keep 125, and agree the 125 to be sacrificed so we can all get back to a semblance of normality. It's gone on too long now. Neither side is coming out of this well despite good intentions, but an acceptance of this plan may allow both sides to withdraw with some degree of success and restore some dignity to the city.

Edited February 9, 2018 by 1978

[dave_the_m 61]

If they want a discussion why do they always make demands?

Because SCC have been stonewalling for years, and refusing any meaningful discussions.This includes repeatedly refusing to answer legitimate FOI requests, then lying to the Information Commissioner's Office about their reasons for refusal.

 

---------- Post added 09-02-2018 at 09:23 ----------

 

OK, enough of the bickering, point scoring time is over. [snip suggestion to split the difference].

So if hypothetically I overcharged you £500 in a contract, then in small-claims court the judge told us stop the bickering and for me to pay you back half what what claimed, regardless of the merits, that would be a fair outcome?

 

Also, the controversy doesn't end there. Amey are contractually allowed (we think) to cut down a further 12,000 street trees over the next 20 years.

[paula4sheff 10]

If they want a discussion why do they always make demands?

 

The Rustlings Road petition back in 2015.

 

"We, the undersigned, refute the assertion that the felling of Lime (Tilia sp.) trees on Rustlings Road is necessary. Instead, we demand, and believe it imperative, that sensitive engineering solutions (1) be adopted and implemented to enable the long-term retention of these trees."

https://www.change.org/p/sheffield-city-council-streetsahead-sheffield-gov-uk-save-the-12-trees-on-rustlings-road-sheffield

 

No different in 2018.

 

"Campaigners were demanding to see details of the £2.2bn private finance initiative deal (PFI) between Sheffield City Council and Amey, the private contractor carrying out the work."

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-42986609

 

Having spent more years than I care to remember in jobs that required negotiation with local authorities and central government, "demands"don't sit squarely with "sit down and discuss".

 

Because people have asked, via foi requests, again and again to see the details of the contract that involves our money and been refused. After that things become demands- as they have done in many protests through history- from giving women the vote, to equal rights. The contract is being witheld- and people are demanding we see it.

 

The tree felling issue is what people are suggesting all parties meet to discuss- not the shady deal that we all funded but aren't allowed to know about.

[Baron99 772]

Because people have asked, via foi requests, again and again to see the details of the contract that involves our money and been refused. After that things become demands- as they have done in many protests through history- from giving women the vote, to equal rights. The contract is being witheld- and people are demanding we see it.

 

The tree felling issue is what people are suggesting all parties meet to discuss- not the shady deal that we all funded but aren't allowed to know about.

 

Maybe prior to the local elections in May, we should remind our sitting councillors of a quote from Jeremy Corbyn. "The only thing which changes a politician's behaviour is something that threatens their ability to get re-elected."