Fitzalan square regeneration

[The Joker 10]

No arguments to present then, just abuse.

 

come on, it was a joke

 

I’ve said earlier on this thread that I’m happy for our complacent city council to get a well-deserved kicking from time to time, but when the tree-protesters have 30 policemen standing round all day doing nowt, while other parts of the city only get a crime number for insurance purposes after they’ve been burgled, I have to ask you what the hell is going on.

 

So please, just what the hell is going on?

[birobasher 27]

come on, it was a joke

 

I’ve said earlier on this thread that I’m happy for our complacent city council to get a well-deserved kicking from time to time, but when the tree-protesters have 30 policemen standing round all day doing nowt, while other parts of the city only get a crime number for insurance purposes after they’ve been burgled, I have to ask you what the hell is going on.

 

So please, just what the hell is going on?

 

The police - certainly the riot police - are unnecessary. It's a propaganda tactic by the council to paint the protesters as violent. In fact it's the protesters who have been assaulted, repeatedly. Sheffield Council have been refusing to answer questions or carry out a reasonable debate about the issues, instead resorting very quickly to smear tactics.

 

We find ourselves in this sorry state because of an opaque PFI contract and a company that's only working to benefit itself, not the city. Tree protesters are content for dead and diseased trees to be removed, even ones that cause a genuine threat to the structure of houses, or make pavements unpassable. The problem is the last category isn't that common, but Amey just carry on chopping regardless. They ignore the advice of the council's own experts, the supposed Independent Tree Panel, say one thing then do the other. For instance back when the Rustlings Road trees were cut in a pre-dawn raid (!) the tree panel report specified certain trees be retained. Amey cut all of them down. This keeps happening. In fact Amey's own arborists now refuse to carry out this work, meaning Amey have been forced to find sub-contractors who will chop anything down, no questions asked.

 

The attitude of the council is what's escalated this issue: complacent, arrogant, high-handed, undemocratic and bullying. Threatening not just protesters but elected officials with prison or destitution for staging peaceful direct action. In a deep and unpleasant irony, the tool used by the supposedly Labour council is anti-trade union legislation brought in by the Tory government in the 90s. I agree, they deserve a kicking at the ballot box. I'm voting Green next time, but never Tory or Lib Dem. Neither of those will improve things: the Lib Dems are the ones who negotiated the PFI in the first place.

[The Joker 10]

the Lib Dems are the ones who negotiated the PFI in the first place.

 

I’m pleased you at least pointed this out.

 

Our Labour council get blamed for everything wrong with the city, from the number of bus lanes, to the number of immigrants, to the cost of business rates, but the Lib Dums are just as responsible for some of the cockups we’ve suffered over the last decade.

[Cyclone 10]

come on, it was a joke

 

I’ve said earlier on this thread that I’m happy for our complacent city council to get a well-deserved kicking from time to time, but when the tree-protesters have 30 policemen standing round all day doing nowt, while other parts of the city only get a crime number for insurance purposes after they’ve been burgled, I have to ask you what the hell is going on.

 

So please, just what the hell is going on?

 

Do you think it's the protesters who've somehow managed to get the police to commit this ridiculous level of resource? Or is perhaps the council?

 

The contract was originally negotiated by a Liberal Democrat led council but was finalised under Labour and signed in 2012.

And it's the current labour council who are doing everything they can to defend the contract, keep it in place and keep the details secret.

[The Joker 10]

And it's the current labour council who are doing everything they can to defend the contract, keep it in place and keep the details secret.

 

Well then we can all look forward to Lord Bobar’s triumphant return to local government, with him promising a full inquiry into the PFI contract *if* we vote him in . . . only for him to break that promise and refuse to hold an inquiry once he’s in charge of the council.

 

I’m not gonna be fooled twice

[Bruce_Shark 10]

People protest about losing the trees closest to them, that's the opposite of nimbyism, it's protecting their own local environment.

 

Is that a joke?

 

You've just defined NIMBY.

 

Cut down trees: Not in my area! Carry on elsewhere though...

 

[Narden Dee 10]

If they were moving fences its most likely because they have been protesting about Amey not using the correct brackets for holding the fences together. They have been using normal cable ties instead of proper fence ties or the metal brackets the fences were originally supplied with by the manufacturer.

 

Its not just about them felling trees that didn't need felling, its also about them not doing it to correct safety standards.

 

there is a word for your reason and it comes from as bull

 

There is no designated safety standard for temporary fencing tie warps are perfectly adequate if people dont interfere as the protesters have been , if they are that bothered they can contact the HSE who will inspect and make appropriate recomendations to the contractors what they cannot do is move them and in effect make them unsafe

 

---------- Post added 11-03-2018 at 21:16 ----------

 

The impact of the thousands of trees being removed across the city isn't insignificant though. Just like the impact of a single car journey is insignificant, but the impact of the collective isn't.

 

---------- Post added 11-03-2018 at 12:30 ----------

 

 

Clearly if they had to take out a high court injunction then the law was not being broken. If it was then no civil action would have been necessary would it.

And from all the media coverage at the moment it would seem to be Amey and their hired security firms who are now breaking the law by assaulting people.

 

well technically they were breaking the law by entering a designated work site without permission under Health & Safety at Work Act

[Longcol 602]

The impact of the thousands of trees being removed across the city isn't insignificant though.

 

What is the significance of losing less than 0.5% of the trees in the city?

 

We seem to have survived another winter with next to no environmental help from the millions of deciduous trees in the northern hemisphere.

[birobasher 27]

I’m pleased you at least pointed this out.

 

Our Labour council get blamed for everything wrong with the city, from the number of bus lanes, to the number of immigrants, to the cost of business rates, but the Lib Dums are just as responsible for some of the cockups we’ve suffered over the last decade.

 

A joint effort: Labour signed it off and it's their responsibility now. But even so, that doesn't commit them to dealing with it in the way they have. That's their choice.

[Micky D 14]

A joint effort: Labour signed it off and it's their responsibility now. But even so, that doesn't commit them to dealing with it in the way they have. That's their choice.

 

Labour did sign it off because it would have cost the council tens of thousands of tax payers money to pull out of the deal that the LibDems had agreed to.

 

The LibDems would have been advised, in the main, by senior StreetForce officers; who else would have had the contractual knowledge? Those officers who had advised on the PFI contractual negotiations and had been old for voluntary retirement would have taken voluntary severance with their pensions intact before PFI started in August 2012. The others who would not have been eligible for the then available voluntary redundancy packages would have been TUPE transferrered to Amey, taking their knowledge with them.

 

Is there any wonder why the city is in the mess that it is now?

 

I do agree that the current council does not have to deal with the situation as they are now doing. The only questions I would ask is how much would alternative strategy cost, who pays for the alternative strategy and, if it is to be funded by SCC, what services would YOU cut in order to fund the alternative strategy?

[Cyclone 10]

What is the significance of losing less than 0.5% of the trees in the city?

 

We seem to have survived another winter with next to no environmental help from the millions of deciduous trees in the northern hemisphere.

 

What is the impact of losing 50% of the street trees in the city?

 

Hmm, looks a bit different now doesn't it.

 

---------- Post added 12-03-2018 at 02:32 ----------

 

 

well technically they were breaking the law by entering a designated work site without permission under Health & Safety at Work Act

 

Don't confuse civil and criminal law.

 

---------- Post added 12-03-2018 at 02:34 ----------

 

Is that a joke?

 

You've just defined NIMBY.

 

Cut down trees: Not in my area! Carry on elsewhere though...

 

 

What bizarre logic, if you protest locally and thus can't be somewhere else AT THE SAME TIME, that is not condoning cutting down elsewhere.

I haven't protested anywhere, I disagree with the removal of the trees throughout the city though.

 

---------- Post added 12-03-2018 at 02:36 ----------

 

Labour did sign it off because it would have cost the council tens of thousands of tax payers money to pull out of the deal that the LibDems had agreed to.

You're confused about how contracts work. There was no 'agreed to' until Labour signed it off.

 

Is there any wonder why the city is in the mess that it is now?

 

I do agree that the current council does not have to deal with the situation as they are now doing. The only questions I would ask is how much would alternative strategy cost, who pays for the alternative strategy and, if it is to be funded by SCC, what services would YOU cut in order to fund the alternative strategy?

 

If they really are bound by the contract, then the first thing they should do is to publish as much of it as possible to prove it. And they should then use public pressure (the national press for example) to pressure Amey into using the alternative solutions present in the contract instead of taking every excuse to remove trees.

[Micky D 14]

What is the impact of losing 50% of the street trees in the city?

 

Hmm, looks a bit different now doesn't it.

 

---------- Post added 12-03-2018 at 02:32 ----------

 

 

Don't confuse civil and criminal law.

 

---------- Post added 12-03-2018 at 02:34 ----------

 

 

What bizarre logic, if you protest locally and thus can't be somewhere else AT THE SAME TIME, that is not condoning cutting down elsewhere.

I haven't protested anywhere, I disagree with the removal of the trees throughout the city though.

 

---------- Post added 12-03-2018 at 02:36 ----------

 

You're confused about how contracts work. There was no 'agreed to' until Labour signed it off.

 

If they really are bound by the contract, then the first thing they should do is to publish as much of it as possible to prove it. And they should then use public pressure (the national press for example) to pressure Amey into using the alternative solutions present in the contract instead of taking every excuse to remove trees.

 

:hihi::hihi::hihi: